Breitling v Rolex?

[jands8916]

Alright, we all know that Rolex and Breitling both produce great watches that are respected by aviators. Most of the big jet captains I meet as part of my career wear either (with most tending to sport GMTs).http://www.rolexforums.com/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif
:thumbsup:

How do you think Breitling and Rolex compete at every level? Breitling seems to be sold everywhere and are not as exclusive, which to me cheapens the brand. In addition, their product line is all over the map, like TAG.

Your thoughts?

[applebook]

Breitling, IMO, is below Rolex and OMEGA when it comes to movements, history, and iconic designs.

[astcell]

Breitling actually tests every movement they make, not just a sampling of them. I find them #3, with Rolex being #2 and Panerai being #1.

[asadtiger]

rolex ofcourse is more historical, with omega also in the line. IMHO, the problem with breitling is that where rolex and omega make sport as well as dress watches, breitling makes ALL chunky, tool watches, with the one exception of the new flying B among its LARGE collection of models. its a very 'functional' looknig watch that is treasured very well too :)

[RW16610]

rolex ofcourse is more historical, with omega also in the line. IMHO, the problem with breitling is that where rolex and omega make sport as well as dress watches, breitling makes ALL chunky, tool watches, with the one exception of the new flying B among its LARGE collection of models. its a very 'functional' looknig watch that is treasured very well too :)

Yeah, all it boils down to in the end is personal prefrence. Which ever brand make the owner most happy will be their number 1 brand indeed. Breitling is amazing and I used to love the "All in one watch" but prefer balance. My SeaMaster or a Rolex Oyster are ideal for any setting. Not saying I wouldn't wear a Breitling but you know.

[stripec30]

IMO Breitling seems like a better bang-for-your-buck, where as Rolex is a better investment.

[roadcarver]

I'm an equal opportunity watch owner, whatever makes me smile, I will own. That includes a Breitling - and I don't believe it cheapens the brand at all, if its sold at more locations than say Rolex. They just have more distribution, that's all.

[cmr]

breitling makes the most robust chronos you can buy as far as i am concerned. that is what they specialize in and it shows, they are right behind rolex for my favorite watch.

[mickiratt]

I have owned several different models of Rolex's and Breitlings and never had the slightest problem with any of them. They are both great brands for what they are.

Here is my Breitling Chronomat with a graphite dial...

Regards,

Steve



http://usera.imagecave.com/mickiratt/DSCN0638.JPG

http://usera.imagecave.com/mickiratt/RSCN0629.JPG

http://usera.imagecave.com/mickiratt/DSCN0636.JPG

http://usera.imagecave.com/mickiratt/DSCN0634.JPG

[vukotab]

Breitling, IMHO, cannot be compared to Rolex (because of it`s heritage and status), but it surely can be compared with brands such as Omega, Longines, Fortis, even maybe IWC (not including Grand Complications, of course).
I had Breitling for short time and it was amazing watch, both in the terms of quality and accuracy. It was even more accurate than my Rolex Explorer II!
All Breitling`s are COSC certified, and their quartz movement (named Superquartz), too, making it ONLY quartz in the world that has that famous certificate...

Yeah, Breitling is worth of having...

[daveathall]

I beleive that Breitling has overtaken Omega as a watch to want.

[WJGESQ]

I beleive that Breitling has overtaken Omega as a watch to want.

You would just be wrong. Seriously. IMOP.

Omega's have the style, reputation, function, heritage and very broad appeal. The Seamasters and Speedmasters are highly sought after. Breitling will be a mall watch like Movado is a few years.:smokin:

[moby33]

I've always liked Breitlings & almost pulled the trigger on a few models, yet never did. Believe it or not, my BIGGEST complaint with the brand is the fact that they highly polish the heck out of all their models. It seems the only way you can get away from the polished look is to buy titanium examples, but I'm just not a titanium guy. The polish just looks to "In Your Face" shiny...some say it looks more dressy, but to me it degrades the watch and makes it look cheap. I'll take brushed SS any day over polished. I mean, come on, we're talking sport watches with 99.9% of their collection.

My other slight complaint is the fact that their bracelet links seem soooooo loose...I know that's the way they design them for comfort, but to me it almost feels cheap like it is already worn out and loose. In the end, if they started brushing their stainless instead of polishing, I'm sure one would already be in my collection.

[^fai^]

I've always liked Breitlings & almost pulled the trigger on a few models, yet never did. Believe it or not, my BIGGEST complaint with the brand is the fact that they highly polish the heck out of all their models. It seems the only way you can get away from the polished look is to buy titanium examples, but I'm just not a titanium guy. The polish just looks to "In Your Face" shiny...some say it looks more dressy, but to me it degrades the watch and makes it look cheap. I'll take brushed SS any day over polished. I mean, come on, we're talking sport watches with 99.9% of their collection.

My other slight complaint is the fact that their bracelet links seem soooooo loose...I know that's the way they design them for comfort, but to me it almost feels cheap like it is already worn out and loose. In the end, if they started brushing their stainless instead of polishing, I'm sure one would already be in my collection.

Hi Sin Nombre,

I know how you feel...

I myself don't feel good in those bling bling bracelet.
Therefore I go for this, it looks bulky but it's light.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x9/fai27/DSC07981.jpg

[gmh1013]

I have Seamasters and a moon watch, a Colt GMT and a Chronomat ....the problem with
Omega IMHO is their service ....it stinks.....I sent in my prized speedmaster last year and
It came back with scratches on the pan bezel and braclet....I was about to have a stroke and sent it back...they replaced the bezel and buffed out the bracelet but
it took 9 weeks to get it back the first time and 7 weeks the second time.

[roadcarver]

Where else would you get a Breitling and Omega? At a shop in a mall.

I bought both my Omega and Breitlings from an AD located inside a mall.

Breitlings have style and function as well.

You would just be wrong. Seriously. IMOP.

Omega's have the style, reputation, function, heritage and very broad appeal. The Seamasters and Speedmasters are highly sought after. Breitling will be a mall watch like Movado is a few years.:smokin:

[cmr]

You would just be wrong. Seriously. IMOP.

Omega's have the style, reputation, function, heritage and very broad appeal. The Seamasters and Speedmasters are highly sought after. Breitling will be a mall watch like Movado is a few years.:smokin:

i would have to respectfully disagree. breitling is a aviation inspired watch and are very big in that circle of life. i live on/am part owner of a private airport and work for boeing on commercial/private jets all day, breitling has completely restored, owns and operates the only flying super connie lockheed C-121C super constellation (L-1049F) left in the world and has the only privately owned jet aerial demonstration team in the world. i don't even know one single person that owns an omega. there are no malls where i live that sell breitling what ever that means, i bought my rolex gmt2c in woodland hills mall at reed's jewelers. i can buy a omega at sam's wholesale but i have to go to moody's jewelers to get a breitling. when you enter into the world of aviation breitling has more history and heritage than any other watchmaker that i am aware of.

enjoy, :cheers::thumbsup:

super connie, :agree:

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?airlinesearch=Breitling%20(Super%20Co nstellation%20Flyers)&distinct_entry=true

it's time to kick the tires and light the fires, turn and burn baby, :clap:

http://www.dailymotion.com/el-torro-92700/video/x4pvt1_bretling-jet-team_extreme

[lorsban]

Breitling vs. Rolex?

Value for money: Breitling
Resale: Rolex

They both make great watches, though. So, it really depends on what your style/usage preferences are. Breitling's seem to be more innovative, though. But as far as style goes, Breitling likes making watches that make a bold statement, while Rolex is more subdued and conservative.

[JJ Irani]

Breitling is Breitling.....and Rolex is Rolex; and never the twain shall meet - thank the Lord!! :read::chuckle::chuckle:

[bgp123]

Breitling's are stunning, but...I was looking at buying at a Seawolf, but at 44x18mls it looked way too chunky (I'm slim-wristed). It's great to know it's water-resistant to 10,000 feet, but no good to me because I never got around to learning to swim let alone dive.

[moby33]

but no good to me because I never got around to learning to swim.

Well...it's not like you're living on an island surrounded by water. Oh wait...

[krlyuzh]

Just about every day, few times a day, I get a customer in who looks at watches, as they go through my cases of Rolex and come up to first case of Breitling, I hear this question: "How does Breitling compare to Rolex?"

Well, it doesn't. Its like comparing a Bentely Azure to a Ferrari F430. The watches have different backgrounds, different history, different style. Rolex is classic, original, one of the 3 companies in the world(besides Patek and Jaeger, correct me if im wrong) who still makes the watch completely in-house from movement to bracelet. Rolex is responsible for first wrist watch as well as frist water-proof watch. The styles really tend to NOT change with Rolex. Until recently, Rolex has had moderately sized at 34, 36, 39, and 40mm cases(for men). I really don't think I need to tell you the epic models Rolex has been making for years and years.

With Breitling, it is one of the few brands in the world that puts EVERY watch they make through COSC certification, the ONLY company in the world to do it with quartz watches. These watches are timepiece instruments. Their style is VERY different from that of Rolex. The only model that comes even remotely close to be able to compare is a Cockpit vs DateJust. Cockpit is bigger, but was actually designed specifically to compete with Rolex Datejust. It is a very simple, beautiful watch. All others, you just CAN'T compare. They also do have their historic landmarks. The Navitimer for example, the oldest chrono wrist watch in the world. It has been made practically in the same style since the 1950's. The Chrono-Matic was one of the very first, if not THE first, automatic chronographs when it was released in 1960's.

Both of these brands are incredible imo, but I just honestly cannot say one is better than the other. It is all personal preference as to which style is like by whom.

As far as someone's comment about Breitling being sold EVERYWHERE. I will have to disagree and say that Breitling is even more exclusive that Rolex. There are a lot more Rolex AD's out there than Breitling.

[simbal]

Well said!:clap:

[Thomas Carey]

IMO Breitling seems like a better bang-for-your-buck, where as Rolex is a better investment.

I agree Rolex really holds up well typically as an investment. Especially when compared to just about any other brand. But Breitling does give you a lot of value. Especially their entry level models.

That being said I very much agree with the sentiment. That this really is like comparing apples and oranges. I have never thought of the two as catering to the same market really.

Best Regards,

Thomas Carey

[lorsban]

Well said, kirill!

[Operator]

I love Rolex and I own Breitling, I would buy no other brands just these two.

[moby33]

I love Rolex and I own Breitling, I would buy no other brands just these two.

If you love Rolex & Breitling, I'm sure you would also love many Omega models. Why limit yourself...based on your statement, I would bet you would fall in love w/ Omega and be a 3 brand kind of guy.

[leopardprey]

Both Rolex and Breitlings are great watches. Both have history and loyal followings. Some like Breitlings more due to more of their Tool Watch fucntions, AR coated Crystals and larger sizes. More variety with Breitling. I also like how Breitling is true to their Tool watch roots, where Rolex has become more bling bling and luxury oriented. Both Rolex and Breitling have great service for their watches and both have ruggedd movements. IMHO, Breitling is a better buy for the money (yes, Rolex has a higher resale value, but are you buying to wear or buying to flip down the road).

The Super Ocean Heritage 46 is a great looking watch!!

To me, Breitling and Omega have replaced Rolex as the higher end Tool watch that professionals would use.

[Trurolexer]

:clap:ROLEX RULES!!!:clap:

[Thomas Carey]

To me, Breitling and Omega have replaced Rolex as the higher end Tool watch that professionals would use.

I have to say I agree with this statement. I believe that people are not generally buying a Rolex to be used as a tool. Not that it's a bad thing.

Best Regards,

Thomas Carey

[SLRdude]

Just about every day, few times a day, I get a customer in who looks at watches, as they go through my cases of Rolex and come up to first case of Breitling, I hear this question: "How does Breitling compare to Rolex?"

Well, it doesn't. Its like comparing a Bentely Azure to a Ferrari F430. The watches have different backgrounds, different history, different style. Rolex is classic, original, one of the 3 companies in the world(besides Patek and Jaeger, correct me if im wrong) who still makes the watch completely in-house from movement to bracelet. Rolex is responsible for first wrist watch as well as frist water-proof watch. The styles really tend to NOT change with Rolex. Until recently, Rolex has had moderately sized at 34, 36, 39, and 40mm cases(for men). I really don't think I need to tell you the epic models Rolex has been making for years and years.

With Breitling, it is one of the few brands in the world that puts EVERY watch they make through COSC certification, the ONLY company in the world to do it with quartz watches. These watches are timepiece instruments. Their style is VERY different from that of Rolex. The only model that comes even remotely close to be able to compare is a Cockpit vs DateJust. Cockpit is bigger, but was actually designed specifically to compete with Rolex Datejust. It is a very simple, beautiful watch. All others, you just CAN'T compare. They also do have their historic landmarks. The Navitimer for example, the oldest chrono wrist watch in the world. It has been made practically in the same style since the 1950's. The Chrono-Matic was one of the very first, if not THE first, automatic chronographs when it was released in 1960's.

Both of these brands are incredible imo, but I just honestly cannot say one is better than the other. It is all personal preference as to which style is like by whom.

As far as someone's comment about Breitling being sold EVERYWHERE. I will have to disagree and say that Breitling is even more exclusive that Rolex. There are a lot more Rolex AD's out there than Breitling.

I actually agree with most facts in this post. (I usually stay out of Rolex VS Brand threads) :cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

Look... I'm going to get FLAMED for this... But Rolexes are a dime a dozen. They make almost a million watches a year! More than Omega and Breitling combined!
For every Breitling that I spot, I probably see hundreds of Rolexes.
Is Rolex a great watch? Yes. It is. And it will outlive any of us.

And what's wrong with malls? :thinking:
In USA, most uber-expensive dealers are in the mall. :thinking::thinking:

[leopardprey]

MOst all the ADs, whether Rolex or other high end brands are located at ADs or Boutiques in Malls in Asia. Rolex is a status symbol these days, where Breitlings are tools.

I like the Navitimer World, for example, Chronograph and date feature, GMT dual time function, slide rule bezel, and world time zones engraved on the back. That is a tool!

You want a great 2 watch combo? Get a Breitling Navitimer and then get an Omega Dive watch.

[BigHat]

Own them both. Just different. B makes some very attractive models. My friend just got a chrono from his wife for his birthday. Very attractive dial and wonderful bracelet. Have been playing with it a bit and rate results thus far have been excellent.

[bankerII]

I own both and they are both great.

[USP45Tim]

+1. They have their own respective uses.


I own both and they are both great.

[iwantagmt]

Well, it doesn't. Its like comparing a Bentely Azure to a Ferrari F430. The watches have different backgrounds, different history, different style. Rolex is classic, original, one of the 3 companies in the world(besides Patek and Jaeger, correct me if im wrong) who still makes the watch completely in-house from movement to bracelet. Rolex is responsible for first wrist watch as well as frist water-proof watch.


.

Actually the first wrist watch was by Patek Philippe on 1868.

Also, Patek's 5070 chrono is a Lemania base, so technically they dont "make" everything, even though they put a unique finish on it and upgrade the escapement and put a cap on the column wheel. VC does similair but less extensive mods to the same base in some of their chronos.

It is my understanding that these also make all of their own: Seiko, Glashutte Original, FP Journe, Lange & Sohne, Favre Leuba.

I am not a Breitling fan simply for stylistic reasons, so it would not really be constructive for me to comment, I just wanted to clarify the dates and movement info.:cheers:

[lorsban]

I actually agree with most facts in this post. (I usually stay out of Rolex VS Brand threads) :cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

Look... I'm going to get FLAMED for this... But Rolexes are a dime a dozen. They make almost a million watches a year! More than Omega and Breitling combined!
For every Breitling that I spot, I probably see hundreds of Rolexes.
Is Rolex a great watch? Yes. It is. And it will outlive any of us.

And what's wrong with malls? :thinking:
In USA, most uber-expensive dealers are in the mall. :thinking::thinking:

Haha! Funny you should mention "Rolexes are a dime a dozen."

Growing up, I went through a bunch of Tag's, then when the time came that I was about to "upgrade" to a more high-end watch, I settled on the Sub.

When I told my watch dealer my choice, he then said "That watch is a dime a dozen." And he then showed me a watch from a brand I've never even heard of - Breguet Type XX and I was blown away cause it just looked so trick with the titanium case, graphite face. I've never seen anything like it and decided to get it instead of the Sub.

Years later, when I wanted to get a diver's watch to upgrade from my Omega SMP quartz mid-size, I again, looked at the Sub, but upon doing so, another watch, the Superocean, caught my eye. It just looked so robust and it also had a deeper rating, at 5000ft compared to the Sub plus it cost 1/4 the price of the Sub.

So, that's twice I decided to go against the Sub. Good thing too, since next to the DJ, I'm seeing Subs/SD's all over the place and hardly ever see anyone else with a Superocean, and never see anyone with a Type XX.

[kingkongkelley]

I love Breitling and I love Rolex. The problem, however, is when I have worn a Breitling, I look at my wrist and wonder if I should be wearing something else.

When I wear a Rolex, I never question my choice.



:cheers::cheers:

[lorsban]

And he then showed me a watch from a brand I've never even heard of - Breguet Type XX and I was blown away cause it just looked so trick with the titanium case, graphite face.


EDIT: The XX has a carbon-fiber face, not graphite. :dummy:

What happened to the edit option? :thinking:

[ayecarumba]

http://rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=84983

Enjoyed reading and learning a thing or two. For the record, I own and love both. You cannot go wrong with either. My :2:....:


Well, see the above link...Breitling really does treat it's customers to some nice gestures of gratitude...Never had anything like that from Rolex or Omega....even when times were good!
Breitling is the OLDER company between the 2
Breitling has a deeper history of involvement with aviation (Navitimer, Chronographs, Cosmonaute, etc...)and assertively pursues promotion and advertising to build upon that image. Rolex only has 2 models (GMT and AirKing) that really have any aviation heritage associated with them...
Breitling does frequently change/update their models, often dramatically with the exception of the Navitimer series...whereas Rolex takes a much more conservative and slower approach to redesigns or changes
Overall, I believe Breitling makes the most handsome cases/bracelets out there, but the new GMT IIc is a homerun!


Enjoying the discussion!
:cheers:
--Paul

[rodo]

I find rolex to be above breitling. I also find breitling to be much more bang for your buck. The build quality and value is hard to beat. Rolex has a lot of tradition and name behind it.

[boa2]

I wish Breitling appealed to me, because I know they make excellent watches. Other than some of the vintage Navitimers, I just don't find any that call to me. Someday perhaps...

[brainbizz]

I am no watch expert but Rolex just seem to be better quality. I was looking to add one B to my collection but when i picked it up it just did not feel right for me. Don t get me wrong I liked it but it just felt off and the bracelet just looked not as solid. I also was going to buy the Omega Alaska Project but after picking that up I was shocked. I will not comment on that one. I hate to say it but both brands are built for the masses and are not exclusive but if you buy what you like it will not matter.

[sleddog]

Just to add my 2:2: as well.....I have both brands in my collection as well!!! They are apples and Oranges though(as stated in an earlier post)....Both Rolex and Breitling do have very long history and are both very stand up companies!!
That being said,Rolex to me seems alot better in quality than Breitling but you sure pay for that....Rolex is ,and will always be my fav,but breitling is well worth the money if your in that mood and like the style!! Personal preference is the key!! To sum this up,You CANT compare....
Here is my collection containing both brands...:thumbsup:

[Desperado]

This is a conterversial thread that would lead to nothing..both are reputable brands and each has its followers/lovers...but at the end of the day no matter what is the perception, we have to agree that both are very respectable!

[Ecam]

in the aviation industrie, breitlings are the watch we would dream of. the rolex just has that status quo in the general community.

both are great watches, especially the ones with gmt (for rolex)

i wear a breitling to work. and my pam for my casual watch.

ive been wanting the explorer II, but i see a lot of people wearing them. it has become a common watch to see. now im thinking of the gmt 2. lets see.......

just my 2 cents worth.

cheers :cheers:

i would have to respectfully disagree. breitling is a aviation inspired watch and are very big in that circle of life. i live on/am part owner of a private airport and work for boeing on commercial/private jets all day, breitling has completely restored, owns and operates the only flying super connie lockheed C-121C super constellation (L-1049F) left in the world and has the only privately owned jet aerial demonstration team in the world. i don't even know one single person that owns an omega. there are no malls where i live that sell breitling what ever that means, i bought my rolex gmt2c in woodland hills mall at reed's jewelers. i can buy a omega at sam's wholesale but i have to go to moody's jewelers to get a breitling. when you enter into the world of aviation breitling has more history and heritage than any other watchmaker that i am aware of.

enjoy, :cheers::thumbsup:

super connie, :agree:

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?airlinesearch=Breitling%20(Super%20Co nstellation%20Flyers)&distinct_entry=true

it's time to kick the tires and light the fires, turn and burn baby, :clap:

http://www.dailymotion.com/el-torro-92700/video/x4pvt1_bretling-jet-team_extreme

[blackmsport]

I own both and they are both great.

Likewise... Breitling a sportier and stronger built (I think)

[allanofcalifornia]

Rolex all the way! Buy the GMT!


Allan

[moby33]

Likewise... Breitling a sportier and stronger built (I think)

I like a lot of Breitling models (and even owned a few)...but not sure I would be so bold as to state they are "stronger built". How one truly measures that statement is beyond me not to mention numerous Rolex models come to mind that would happily step up to that Breitling challenge (and probably win).

Both great products IMO, but the sandbox statement of, "My dad can beat up your dad" is probably pretty pointless when doing a watch comparison of these two brands. I believe you can never go wrong if you buy what you love & love what you buy & forget about finding a 'winner' when comparing two different watch brands! :cheers:

[AWATCH]

I own Rolex, Breitling and Omega. In my opinion that is the way they go as far as quality. But like opinions there are several out there, thats why we all don't drive Chevy's:cheers:

[cody p]

breitling make a great watch - i think highly of the product. however, i don't care for their designs - and that's a huge part of liking a watch. overall i prefer the rolex aesthetic.

[Blueoctopus007]

Prestige, status, classic style, pedigree, quality, history, etc, etc = Rolex

[Brentomatic]

I own three Breitlings and a Rolex Submariner. My thought is this:

"Breitling is good, however Rolex is great." :thumbsup:

[blackmsport]

I have Breitling, Rolex, Omega... Breitling is heavy but nice, Rolex is classic like a Lexus you simply can't go wrong.... only problem... Rolex ... many think you have a fake one and that annoys me

[Nucengineer]

I have had Rolex's and Breitlings. I think the build quality on Breitling is second to none (fit, finish and sturdyness of bracelets etc.) as far as that goes. Now whether you like their designs is another matter. I will point out that Rolex has no excuse for still selling the Iconic Sub no date with that cheesy non SEL braclet for the price they command. Of the Subs/Dwellers ( I have a D series Dweller) I love the symmetry of the sub no date dial. But I will not buy it with that bracelet and Rolex has no excuse for not upgrading it. Breilting, Omega both make better bracelets. However, I will concede, the latest generation of Rolex braclets are very nice. Why did it takes so long? Same question with the COSC rating on the Sub No date.

As for the bling comments, I guess I don't see how Rolex with the newest bracelets is any more or less blingy than the Breitlings. There, I feel much better now that this rant is through. :banghead:
:cheers:

PS Breitling does offer non polished watches, the Avenger Seawolf, Colt II quartz, Blackbird non polished version, Skyracer and Airwolf Ravens come on rubber straps totally tool, Emergency, Aerospace - Ti, Avenger Seawolf Chrono. So there is a variety if bling is not your thing.

[WJGESQ]

Breitling actually tests every movement they make, not just a sampling of them. I find them #3, with Rolex being #2 and Panerai being #1.

Curious chronology you have there. How would Panerai earn the top spot out of the three? They may be more rare, more expensive, but do not seem to have the history achievement/associations of Rolex and Omega. Do they?

[lorsban]

Personally, I think aesthetics is too much of a personal thing to be argued either way. Same thing for saying a particular brand is better mainly because it's more popular.

However, I do think it's perfectly ok to compare similar product lines. For example:

Breitling SuperOcean vs. Sub Date or Breitling __________ vs. Daytona etc...

[STEELINOX]

I like both brands. I especially like and will get the now decommissioned B1 Superquartz. Its got the alarm, the dual time zones, SuperQd movmt. And its dead nuts accurate. I think its a mark above the GMTc. If only ROLEX could build a watch like this, man, whata world it culd b !

Thanks,
Randy

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h256/gadriches/coposite.jpg

[Lol-x]

Randy those B1 Chronometers are getting difficult to find as production ceased in 2006.

I agree this is my favorite Breitling too. :agree:

I am getting mine from a guy in Sweden.

[STEELINOX]

Randy those B1 Chronometers are getting difficult to find as production ceased in 2006.

I agree this is my favorite Breitling too. :agree:

I am getting mine from a guy in Sweden.

there's one on EBay, its gotta gray dial though.

[rtwilbur@gmail.com]

The new Airwolf Raven is really nice, saw it in person. Close to pulling the trigger but I really want the Rolex GMT2c.

[deserted]

Breitling is Breitling.....and Rolex is Rolex; and never the twain shall meet - thank the Lord!! :read::chuckle::chuckle:

X2:thumbsup::thumbsup:

[moby33]

The new Airwolf Raven is really nice, saw it in person. Close to pulling the trigger but I really want the Rolex GMT2c.

Wow...you're not kidding. I didn't even know about this watch until your post...but looked up some pictures and thought "SWEET". If I were in the market for a quartz analog/digital watch, that would probably be at the top of my list. Love the back w/ it's jet turbines design. Really good looking IMO. :cheers:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/breitling-airwolf-raven-2009-basel.jpg

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/breitling-airwolf-raven-2009-basel-.jpg

[multimedia]

Really like both brands, but it's a little bit like apples and oranges for me.

I LOVE my Avanger Skyland, but can't really compare it to my favorite Rolex - the GMT II. They're just 2 completely different pieces, but at the end of the day I think they are both spot on!

Cheers,
Joe

[cobblecanyon]

I owned both and they are both great watches!

[wristbliss]

I find it funny that people always say that Breitling is "more common" than Rolex. In the city I live in there are at least 2 Rolex AD's and only 1 Breitling AD. Breitling is a FANTASTIC watch with a FANTASTIC heritage. They have super customer service. When I purchased my SuperOcean they sent me a letter of thanks and a great hat. When I purchased my Rolex GMTIIc (for about 3x the money) I didn't get squat...from the AD or Rolex. I would advise anyone to take the time to look at the Breitling line and investigate their production quality. My only negative with Breitling is with their tendancy to make their watches "flashy". I'm tend to lean more towards a watch that isn't as "in your face". IMHO, for the money, Breitling is one of the best watches you can purchase.

[moby33]

My only negative with Breitling is with their tendancy to make their watches "flashy". I'm tend to lean more towards a watch that isn't as "in your face".

I agree. I wish a lot of their high polish cases/bracelets were brushed instead...then they would be perfect IMO.

[ebrigm]

I have decided recently to get my long sought after Rolex for my 40th birthday. After going to the AD and trying them all out, I choose the Submariner LV. I came back the next day because I had heard so much about the new Breitling B01. My AD is also a Breitling dealer, so I tried the B01. The moral?

I am still getting the Rolex, but my next watch will be the B01!

[roadcarver]

This is why I got the Chrono Avenger which was Ti. The old SuperOcean Professional had a brushed SS finish which was nice (BTW, that was my Breitling).

I also had the Steelfish blue dial, it was a nice heavy piece but the Pro II SS wasn't as comfy as the Pro I in Ti.

I agree. I wish a lot of their high polish cases/bracelets were brushed instead...then they would be perfect IMO.

[wgs]

I've always liked Breitlings & almost pulled the trigger on a few models, yet never did. Believe it or not, my BIGGEST complaint with the brand is the fact that they highly polish the heck out of all their models. It seems the only way you can get away from the polished look is to buy titanium examples, but I'm just not a titanium guy. The polish just looks to "In Your Face" shiny...some say it looks more dressy, but to me it degrades the watch and makes it look cheap. I'll take brushed SS any day over polished. I mean, come on, we're talking sport watches with 99.9% of their collection.

My other slight complaint is the fact that their bracelet links seem soooooo loose...I know that's the way they design them for comfort, but to me it almost feels cheap like it is already worn out and loose. In the end, if they started brushing their stainless instead of polishing, I'm sure one would already be in my collection.

I agree with you 100%. I think Breitling is "missing the boat" by not offering more models with an all brushed finish, especially with the sportier models. In my opinion they would experience a boost in sales with more brushed surfaced watches. I would hop on the Breitling train if they did it...

[moby33]

This is why I got the Chrono Avenger which was Ti. The old SuperOcean Professional had a brushed SS finish which was nice (BTW, that was my Breitling).

I also had the Steelfish blue dial, it was a nice heavy piece but the Pro II SS wasn't as comfy as the Pro I in Ti.
I agree. Not only is the Pro I more comfortable IMO, I like the look of it a lot better than the Pro II. Again, II seems more dressy which is not the look I'm going for when I sport a watch like a Breitling.

I agree with you 100%. I think Breitling is "missing the boat" by not offering more models with an all brushed finish, especially with the sportier models. In my opinion they would experience a boost in sales with more brushed surfaced watches. I would hop on the Breitling train if they did it...

Yep. I eventually bought a Skyland Avenger Blacksteel as the DLC finish was awesome. I liked pretty much everything about the watch except one minor point. The hands just seemed too plain to me and pretty thin...hence the lume wasn't very good (actually, the lume of the markers was pretty week too due to their small size).

Those knocks aside, I was planning on keep the watch for at least a year until I was going to flip to purchase a DSSD (the boss, aka wife, wasn't going to authorize more expansion to my collection in terms of numbers)...but sure enough about a month after I bought it I found a DSSD and had to purchase (this was over a year ago when it wasn't very easy to find a DSSD). So, the Breitling didn't stay in the collection too long. I'm sure I'll get another soon as I've seen a few w/ their new collection that look promising via pictures. :cheers:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/12-1.jpg

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/14-1.jpg

SA vs Sub Date lume:
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/IMG_1773.jpg

[cobblecanyon]

I don't wear alot of jewelry but I do like nice watches and sometimes,,,depending on the occassion, a nice bling from Breitling is in order. Now, the newer GMT IIc has a nice polished band and it gets attention when you wear it also. I don't like alot of diamonds or any for that matter on my watch, but a nice clean polished band is exactly what I look for when shopping for watches. IMHO, Breitlings, Rolex, Omega, Tags, Panerai...are all beautiful watches and one of my mission in life is to have 2 from each manufactures for my collection.

[JJ Irani]

Here is a side-by-side comparison of both my ex's - you be the judge!! :thumbsup:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/JJIrani/DSCN1481.jpg

[jcatral14]

My BB has the brushed/satin finish and it's the big reason I picked it up :thumbsup:

http://www.bimmerfest.com/photos/data/500/IMG_3755M.jpg

[moby33]

My BB has the brushed/satin finish and it's the big reason I picked it up :thumbsup:

http://www.bimmerfest.com/photos/data/500/IMG_3755M.jpg

That watch is killer. The brushed finish and those new big date windows are awesome IMO. I really like this watch...nice!!! :cheers:

[petesjag]

I seriously love my Breitlings because they are a marvel to look at, and they have a wondewrful wrist presence. I dont own any from the navitimer series but I understand that they are more dress watches. I like the sportyness of this brand...

[petesjag]

My B1...
I was thinking about selling but wearing this watch again makes me realize that I must be crazy.....
http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii180/jaguarmk2/DSC08266.jpg
pete

[Gerardus]

I love Breitling as well Omega.But for me Rolex is the one!

[dcourtenayt]

I agree, Breitlings lose their value much more than Rolex. Rolex seems to stay the same or even increase in value.

[Nicko]

No comparison. Sorry.

[Ricochet]

For me, brand is tertiary to function and form. So here is my shortlist....

Jan 2010----Rolex DateJust II, Steel/Yellow Gold:thumbsup:
Then------- Breitling Two-tone B01:smokin:
Then------- IWC Grand Complication:dude:
Then------- Patek Phillipe:cheers:

[john88]

Breitling used to be my favorite brand i own a superavenger and had a steelfish x plus that I sold. No complaints as far as quality and craftsmanship, but imo I think theyre just to big and kinda all look the same. All the watches in the aeromarine series have basically the same exact case and face layout. At 1 point I was really in2 the big watch fad hence the super avenger (48mm) but now I guess my taste matured alil hence 36mm date just. . Just feel that rolex has such a classy look and Breitlings alil more ostentatious maybe?? Def regret my super avenger if wanted big watch in the future hands down dssd or if really had money 2 blow ap royal oak offshore

[scrog10]

Breitling is Breitling.....and Rolex is Rolex; and never the twain shall meet - thank the Lord!! :read::chuckle::chuckle:

They meet at my house. Two very different watches. Exp 2 and Chrono Avenger. Both great watches but one of them is far better value in the preloved market. But to non watch lovers a Rolex is the one they know.

[Edward-K]

I have always been impressed with breitling quality, however their designs do little for me. I like the evolutions and blackbird but thats about it. too many shiny parts for me. Ed

[Widows Son]

Here is a side-by-side comparison of both my ex's - you be the judge!! :thumbsup:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/JJIrani/DSCN1481.jpg

That's too easy!!! Out of these two I'll take the.....Breitling!!!

[Double_J]

I like my Breitling Chronomat Evo but I love my Rolexes.

I've also never been a fan of how Breitling handles the numbers on their dials (roman or arabic). They just end up looking a bit too busy to my eye when combined with the Chronograph dials. My Chronomat has batons and the face seems to come off as much cleaner.

[Ageing Orphan]

I have decided recently to get my long sought after Rolex for my 40th birthday. After going to the AD and trying them all out, I choose the Submariner LV. I came back the next day because I had heard so much about the new Breitling B01. My AD is also a Breitling dealer, so I tried the B01. The moral?

I am still getting the Rolex, but my next watch will be the B01!

I did the same thing today. Went in to buy my Rolex GMT Master IIc and was shown the Breitling Chronomat B01 which I liked a lot. It is the first fully 'in-house' movement from Breitling with a 70HR reserve!!

I bought the Rolex, but I think my next watch (in a year or two) will be the SS - Black dial - Divers band B01.:thumbsup:

[2th DR]

I don't know how they compare, but I'm about to find out.... I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on a B01 two-tone....

[monaco]

Rolex rulz! they are analog, mechanical watches and hence you are in complete harmony with your machine:biggrin:, whereas Breitling have dual functioning watches to offer. Plus the depreciation of Breitlings....

[mr.clean]

by dual functioning, do you mean the Superquartz? I give them credit for making a highly accurate quartz movement even though do not want one.

And honestly....who buys a watch for an investment? I don't care about resale because I'm buying mine to wear not to resell someday. If you can afford to buy something this expensive then you shouldn'y care about resale.

[canadian seadweller]

Hi. Just thought I would throw my two cents worth into this interesting conversation.
Like someone else mentioned earlier, IMO, Rolex makes a better investment watch. I purchased a Submariner back in 1987 which then had a list price of $1800. I sold it several years later without the box/papers and basically got my money back. Last year, before purchasing my seadweller, a local dealer was sellling the same model and approximately the same year for $4500. As I understand it, Rolex deliberately under produce their watches and dislike offering discounts. A rolex owner once remarked that you essentially own your rolex for free because if/when you sell it, you can get all your money back as was in my case.
That being said, Breitling has some very attractive watches that are also attractively priced, and I'm not skilled enough to say whether the quality of a rolex alone would justify the higher price.
I'm considering buying another watch but can't decide between Omega, Breitling, or Doxa. Decisions, decisions.

[bokmeipai]

That's too easy!!! Out of these two I'll take the.....Breitling!!!

IMO Rolex is a more superior watch and holds value better. But it's all a matter of preferences.

[mr.clean]

Rolex is way too conservative for me. I've tried them on and they feel too small.

[jcatral14]

I think what hurts Breitling in the eyes of Rolex fans is the fact that one can get a Breitling at a big discount. This deep discounting has a negative effect on the brand and is perceived as a sign of lower quality. If you discount that fact (pun intended), you can see that pound for pound (or milligram for milligram) a Breitling is every bit as good as a Rollie any day of the week.

My 0.02 on the subject :cheers:

[mr.clean]

I'll take all the big discounts I can get!!! plus I think it's a more attractive watch.
who brags about paying full retail? No one. Maybe we can find the most expensive retailer and all buy our stuff their to be cool.

[shuarma]

rolex is a lot more famous than breitling IMO, but they're a bit too mainstream for me. i would take a breitling over a rolex.

[Nairn1980]

Silly question to ask on a Rolex Forum IMO

[Blimms]

I just pulled the trigger on a Breitling World Navitimer - I love it !!! Compared to my PL/SS Yachtmaster ................the wife likes the Breitling much better. I still love the Yachtmaster, but it's about to get less wrist. :cheers:

[bewithabob]

Breitling depreciation is 40-50% from day one... new stock is often discounted by retailers by at least 25-35%...

[obmto]

Breitling depreciation is 40-50% from day one... new stock is often discounted by retailers by at least 25-35%...

And you getting those numbers where?

The retail on a Chronomat Evo is $5840. Where on earth are you going to find one at $3800 (35% reduction) new at an AD? And where on earth are you going find a one day old Chronomat Evo for $1900 (50% depreciation after getting one for 35% off).

Stop being ridiculous.

[kizerman]

I own both and they are too different to compare.

The only issue I have with Rolex is the sizes of their mens watches. They have refused (other than the recent DSSD) to increase the case size and the 40mm's look almost feminine to me now. I know 3 women who wear 40mm Rolexes and none of them weigh more than 120 lbs.

I'm not looking for a 46mm Rolex, but come one, change with the times a bit...or atleast adjust to the size increase in human beings!

I think a 42mm sub or GMT option would be nice and very popular. After wearing a 44mm PAM or a Breitling, my Rolex just looks so small on my wrist.

[Widows Son]

IMO Rolex is a more superior watch and holds value better. But it's all a matter of preferences.

Out of those TWO, I'd take the Breitling. I just can't get excited about the gold bezel on the Rolex. Now if you asked me to pick between a ND SD and an Emergency, it would be the Rolex.

[moby33]

I own both and they are too different to compare.

The only issue I have with Rolex is the sizes of their mens watches. They have refused (other than the recent DSSD) to increase the case size and the 40mm's look almost feminine to me now. I know 3 women who wear 40mm Rolexes and none of them weigh more than 120 lbs.

I'm not looking for a 46mm Rolex, but come one, change with the times a bit...or atleast adjust to the size increase in human beings!

I think a 42mm sub or GMT option would be nice and very popular. After wearing a 44mm PAM or a Breitling, my Rolex just looks so small on my wrist.

I agree...yet I think you'll find the majority on this forum prefer status quo and therefore resist change. Even mentioning a Sub going to 40+mm around these parts seems to quickly take on a sacrilegious tone that is nothing but blaspheme...oh yeah, and don't even get me started on the reaction to a...hold your breathe...dare I say it...Daytona-Date! If I read one more, "The Daytona is PERFECT, don't change an ICON" I'm going to puke. No watch is 'perfect', yet all too often many seem to think that's the case. :banghead:

[mike516]

I think Rolex is definitely classier. Breitling's are nice...but I'm actually not a big fan of there stainless steel bracelets. Much bigger fan of the Oyster bracelet.

[kizerman]

I think Rolex is definitely classier. Breitling's are nice...but I'm actually not a big fan of there stainless steel bracelets. Much bigger fan of the Oyster bracelet.

Im not a big fan of the high polished bracelets but the Pro II in brushed steel is awesome.

[Nucengineer]

I own both presently and have owned many previously. If you ask the question, if you can only buy Rolex or Breitling going forward IMHO, I think Breitling offers alot more diversity of watches and their build quality is better. Even though they are using ETA movements their accuracy is hard to question as all their movements are COSC after they are done tweaking them. Although they don't fetch as much on the resale market as Rolex, you can, in a lot of instances buy two Breitlings for the price of one Rolex. Give Breitling a few more years with the development of their own in house movements (B01 and Superquartz and more to follow I'm sure) and they will be comming on even stronger.
PS I've owned 3 different speedmasters and a planet ocean and although they are fine watches in many ways, I think for the above average working man that Breitling, Omega and then Rolex offers the most bang for the buck in that order.
That being said, my favorite watch is still my Seadweller.

Regards,

Jim

[mandrew]

Had the pleasure of owning a 14060m for 7 years but unfortunately lost it just before christmas. Went last week to replace it and couldn't believe it had gone from £1980 to £3460! Whats changed apart from filling up the holes and putting COSC on the front. My old watch met COSC continually and so it should for 2k. Thought I'd have a look at the Breitlings as I've never owned one. For just under 2k I got a colt II an absolutely stunning and well made watch and the girlfriend a beautiful ring for £1500. As far as I can see the Colt is well better value than the rolex. Just a bit unsure about Breitling using ETA, do they do a lot of work on them?

[daveathall]

Nothing wrong with ETA movements, tweeked or otherwise, workhorse movements that will go forever.

[blackmsport]

I own both (speedmaster & superocean) love them both

[AAMD11]

I prefer a Breitling over a Rolex, a lot more diversity in Breitling. I would not underestimate ETA movement tho even as they are tweaked by several manufacturers.

[mandrew]

Yep the ETA's fine only gained 22 seconds since I set it on 19th Feb, so only approx +2 secs per day. I can stop worrying now.

[Nairn1980]

Breitling has a much diverse lineup. all rolexes look the same to me and are too small

Erm this is a Rolex forum....stupid thing to say.

And they all look the same? so you think a Daytona, Yachtmaster 2 and Sub all look the same?

Yeh right....whatever!

[obmto]

Erm this is a Rolex forum....stupid thing to say.

And they all look the same? so you think a Daytona, Yachtmaster 2 and Sub all look the same?

Yeh right....whatever!

Yachmaster 2 and Sub yes. So you now have 2 different looking watches. :rolleyes:

How many models are based of the Submariner case anyways? Talk about boring...

[stusrt]

How do you think Breitling and Rolex compete at every level? Breitling seems to be sold everywhere and are not as exclusive, which to me cheapens the brand. In addition, their product line is all over the map, like TAG.
Your thoughts?

I have to say - there seems to be 3 or 4 Rolex AD's in Michigan for every Breitling AD.
I love them both - but I probably spot 20 Rolexes around Detroit for every Breitling I see.

I have owned several of both brands, and I will not pick a fav.
You simply cannot compare - I don't think someone wanting to buy a Skyland at $3k is going to change his mind for a DSSD at $10k.
And someone wanting a DJII is not going to want a Super Avenger.

[stusrt]

and if you need something really super-duper complex (like a chrono AND date)
you have to go with Breitling.

[scrog10]

Breitling started out in 1884 and Rolex as far as know started around 1906. How do Rolex have more history. I think the Rolex movements are smoother than Breitlings I have owned but Breitling finish their watches better in my opinion. Rolex cant be bothered to polish between the lugs. Then they have the cheek to charge more and more each year without improvement. Value its Breitling resale its Rolex.

[obmto]

Breitling started out in 1884 and Rolex as far as know started around 1906. How do Rolex have more history. I think the Rolex movements are smoother than Breitlings I have owned but Breitling finish their watches better in my opinion. Rolex cant be bothered to polish between the lugs. Then they have the cheek to charge more and more each year without improvement. Value its Breitling resale its Rolex.

Breitling was a pioneer in chronograph movements. I say that's a pretty good history.

[maxxor]

earlier i read a comment that the problem with rolex is everyone thinks your wearing a fake....

:dummy:

and their arent fake breitlings and omegas everywhere also????

:lol:

for what its worth....heres my rank:

1) Rolex
2) Omega
3) Breitling


as for the posers with fakes?

:bartmoon:

[Omega21]

This is a great thread. I agree with the earlier poster who said he likes the Rolex bracelets better - I have to agree. I think the Rolex bracelets are very elegant and a better fit in formal/professional settings vice the Breitling bracelets that are very sporty (to my eye). I just don't care for the Breitling bracelet look - especially that diagnoal cut design like on the Pro IIs.
I also agree with the above, based on my experience, that fit/finish on Breitlings is slightly better then Rolex. Beyond that when it comes to size, diversity of design, dial layouts, movements, etc. that as long as you compare apples to apples (i.e. don't compare the high end of one brand to low end of the other) it really boils down to opinion and what you are looking for at that particular time.
To those that have complained about Rolex raising their prices, take a look at Breitling's price trend over the last 15 years - remember, prices are a function of demand not improvements in the watch.

[gtopaul]

[QUOTE=maxxor;1692570]earlier i read a comment that the problem with rolex is everyone thinks your wearing a fake...[QUOTE]

That's pretty much my opinion also. I just don't feel Rolex's are as contemporary styled as Breitling's. Plus almost every Rolex owner I've spoken to locally knows absolutely nothing about his watch other than what it cost. Just different watches for different likes I suppose.

[Green Arrow]

I've owned 6 Rolexes, 1 JLC, 4 GPs, 3 Breitlings, 6Panerais, and a host of Seiko, Ball, Luminox, Timex and on and on.

I've recently sold my Deepsea, and my gold GMT Master II C, but would consider the new SS Submariner if it comes out, or even the TT. Love the look, the maxi-dial, the glidelock, and Rolex's durability. Don't like how small the dials are, even on the Deepsea.

I have a Super Avenger now. Really durable, large enough sub-dials for my almost 60 year old eyes to see. Love the accuracy, comfort of the watch despite the weight on the Pro II bracelet.

The only thing I don't like is that it is probably just a little too big and a lot too flashy. The same watch in brushed SS would probably be better. The COSC timekeeping is just as good as Rolex, and you get the date, the chrono, the timer bezel, and lume about on par with the better Rolexes.

My new Seiko auto 200 meter SRP 043 is a $300 watch and I put a waterproof Chronissimo strap on it. Keeping as good of time as either of the "better" brands, and the lumibrite lume blows both of the other brands into the weeds. Finely ratcheting timing bezel, and the hardlex crystal seems just fine. Makes me wonder a little bit as to why I ever bought a Deepsea, or worse, a gold GMT Master II C. For a daily use watch this inexpensive Seiko is just as good or better than the others if you don't need the chrono, and you really don't. I think if one can get past not looking "rich" with a Rolex on your wrist, a Seiko Marine Master is probably the best all around sport watch you could buy for less than any of these other brands.

The Panerais are a style comment and a group of really terrific people who share a passion. I never get the feeling of durability out of my Panerais that I get out of Rolex, Breitling, Seiko, and Omega.

I've had Omega Speedmasters, POs and PO chronos. Great watches except for the stupid helium release knob on the case.

If I'm buying a watch for showing to other people, I go with Rolex. Well recognized, far more durable than either my JLC or GP experiences except the Seahawk II Pro XL, which is also fabulous.

If I'm buying a watch purely for function, great lume, great legibility, I'd go Seiko and probably a Marine Master.

From there, every single one of these brands makes truly excellent watches, and if we all had to live with any one of these brands we'd still be incredibly lucky. I don't think there are any wrong answers here.

[Ceb]

I've owned a few Breitlings over the years and have been an avid follower of the brand for some time, Its with regret I have to say I'm disappointed with the new models too big, too heavy and too much polished steel, therefore I've decided to keep my Titanium Chrono Avenger Auto and PX my Crosswind Special (to big and heavy, I must be getting old!!) for a Rolex Submariner, which IMO is a probably the most classic watch design ever, but it's all down to the individual......we all have a choice....

[AAMD11]

Breitling has fast become one of my favorite brands. I am looking into the new Colt GMT they announced in Basel. I like its simplicity and functionality, not too big not too common looking (like Rolex) I for one think Rolex is overrated, too conservative for my taste, very minimal difference in styles on the series Rolex has. When I got my new Rado Sintra I was considering the Colt GMT they had there as well. The Rado was actually pricier at 3,500 while the GMT was about 2,800. However, when I saw that a new Colt GMT was announced I decided to get the Rado, very sleek and formal watch I must say. When I get the Colt it will be my everyday watch.

[uracowman]

Isn't this argument really more of personal choice? Not to offend anyone but are you buying the watch because YOU like it or are you buying it so other people go "wow that guy is wearing a rolex!". I mean...come on....

I currently own a Breitling but am in the market to add a Rolex to my collection so I am not by any means biased towards any brand since I love both. For those who say Breitling has a inferior internal mechanical movement system, or doesn't have the "prestige" of Rolex, I think that is your inner Rolex ego speaking. This is absurd in my opinion. My Breitling is incredibly accurate and the last time I checked, both brands meet and exceed COSC certifications for accuracy. The quality and attention to detail are spectacular as well.

In my opinion (OPINION, don't flame me), people believe Rolex is far superior because of a brilliant advertising campaign they have used over the years and people associate Rolex as symbolizing achievement. In reality, Rolex from a technical perspective probably isn't as good of a watch as say a Panerai but people believe so because the company has done a great job over the years with it's price structure and intelligent advertising.

This brings up the age old trick: Blindfold someone with a $1000 bottle of wine and a $10 bottle of wine and ask which is the $1000 dollar bottle?

[multimedia]

In my opinion (OPINION, don't flame me), people believe Rolex is far superior because of a brilliant advertising campaign they have used over the years and people associate Rolex as symbolizing achievement. In reality, Rolex from a technical perspective probably isn't as good of a watch as say a Panerai but people believe so because the company has done a great job over the years with it's price structure and intelligent advertising.

Oh oh, watch out! :justkiddi

I can't say anything regarding the technical side, (I've only had this hobby for a couple of years, and though I always try and want to learn as much as I possibly can - I know that there are guys out there, that are far more superior on this particular subject) but I fully agree with what you are saying about the marketing part. Just look at other luxury goods like for example LV. They are in my opinion the pinnacle of successful marketing campaigns - and have been so for many many years.

It's like that old saying; "people don't buy products, they buy stories"


Another thing that always strikes me as being rather funny, and forgive me because this has probably nothing to do with the org. message in this thread. But sometimes I wonder how much part of a companies fame and success comes from the "dark side", and how much impact this really have on the popularity of the brand?

Just take China as an example. If you ask most people here (the ones that can afford it), what brand they will buy when buying a new bag - they would say LV. Which brand is the most copied brand in the world, and where do these fake products come from? China of course. So year after year, they have been producing these fake bags and spread them all over the country (and the world of course) And now when more and more people here get the money to buy a real bag, what brand to they go for - answer above, but here it is again, the LV.

It's like they've been bombarded with these bags and logos for so many years (being fake though) so now when they have the money, they want the real deal... I'm just wondering if it's the same deal with Rolex when it comes to buying watches? I know I'm talking about one specific case here, and that this perhaps has nothing to do with the rest of the world. But I always found this a bit odd, because I thought that since such a big part of the LV bags one see on the streets over here, is fake, people who can afford to buy the real deal, would instead go for something else rather than with the brand so many people associate with the word fake.

I'm definitely not saying it's marketing, but it's an interesting thing to toss around when talking about why certain brands are so popular.

Cheers,
Joe

[CKLinLA]

... .... I wonder how much part of a companies fame and success comes from the "dark side", ... ... ...
Joe



This a new and interesting idea/viewpoint to me. I do understand that Rolex (or other luxury brand) would not want their stuff pirated, but in some round about way they may reap some benefit down the road....

[lorsban]

I think I said it before, but I'll say it again, I like both brands. But, I respect Breitling more and I find it easier to identify with their products more than with Rolex.

I see it this way: Mass marketing -> Mass recognition -> Mass distribution -> Loss of identity

No matter what the roots of the brand are, what market niche it was intended for, once you mass market it to a broad spectrum of people, a sizable percentage from that broad spectrum will want that same product/brand, whether or not it actually suits their needs or their budget, which eventually leads to a percentage actually ending up with a product from that brand and each individual in this group, by virtue of wearing it around, markets it to others, thereby perpetuating distribution.

Once this happens, and people identify a particular product with a brand, the brand is pressured into producing something that suits a broad spectrum of people, making it as palatable to as many people as possible, thereby turning a very specific functioning product into a "vanilla" product. Something for anyone and everyone, which can also mean it's for nobody in particular.

That's why when I buy a Rolex, I don't identify with it like "this is for me." Rather, it feels like "I've arrived" like I've reached a final destination that everyone wants to get to. Like we're all in some artificial race to the finish line where we have a Rolex, a high-end car, this type of house, this type of job, income, family, wife etc...In other words, it has that superficial "vibe" or feeling of being "assimilated" that I can't quite shake off or stomach.

Unlike with Breitling where the style is so distinct that I know for a fact that not a lot of people will want one. That, in itself, makes it novel, unique, and since I'm attracted by it, it somehow validates my individuality, my own uniqueness. And that to me, is priceless.

[uracowman]

I see it this way: Mass marketing -> Mass recognition -> Mass distribution -> Loss of identity


I completely disagree. Loss of identity? You realize Rolex is probably one of the top 10 most recognized and prestigious consumer non-cyclical brands on our planet right?


No matter what the roots of the brand are, what market niche it was intended for, once you mass market it to a broad spectrum of people, a sizable percentage from that broad spectrum will want that same product/brand, whether or not it actually suits their needs or their budget, which eventually leads to a percentage actually ending up with a product from that brand and each individual in this group, by virtue of wearing it around, markets it to others, thereby perpetuating distribution.
This isn't a bad thing. How is this negative? Just because a broad spectrum of people want one, doesn't mean they can afford one.



Once this happens, and people identify a particular product with a brand, the brand is pressured into producing something that suits a broad spectrum of people, making it as palatable to as many people as possible, thereby turning a very specific functioning product into a "vanilla" product. Something for anyone and everyone, which can also mean it's for nobody in particular.


I don't agree with you here. you realize that almost all of the mainstream timepieces that rolex has used ever since anyone can remember haven't really changed in design. On top of this, Rolex was the first to pioneer many design elements that are used today by many watch makers. This is hardly meeting the general "wants" of the public.



That's why when I buy a Rolex, I don't identify with it like "this is for me." Rather, it feels like "I've arrived" like I've reached a final destination that everyone wants to get to. Like we're all in some artificial race to the finish line where we have a Rolex, a high-end car, this type of house, this type of job, income, family, wife etc...In other words, it has that superficial "vibe" or feeling of being "assimilated" that I can't quite shake off or stomach.


I'll agree with you here but that is just the aura and mentally in the individual that Rolex has achieved in their marketing campaign for the past 70 some odd years.

[lorsban]

I completely disagree. Loss of identity? You realize Rolex is probably one of the top 10 most recognized and prestigious consumer non-cyclical brands on our planet right?

When I say loss of identity, it applies to the consumer base, again the company can be whatever it wants to be, but its consumer base, that group we become a part of, has no identity. Rolex isn't just the brand, it's also the consumers.

This isn't a bad thing. How is this negative? Just because a broad spectrum of people want one, doesn't mean they can afford one.

Not saying it's bad. Of course, every company wants to be in this position. Rather, as a consumer, if you want to be unique, this isn't the way to go.

I don't agree with you here. you realize that almost all of the mainstream timepieces that rolex has used ever since anyone can remember haven't really changed in design. On top of this, Rolex was the first to pioneer many design elements that are used today by many watch makers. This is hardly meeting the general "wants" of the public.

It's true that Rolex came up with a heap of firsts but their latest designs, like the Deapsea for instance, it looks to me like they're joining this whole "me too" fad of upsizing, in your face designing. Compared to the original SD, this looks different. I think there was a thread on here showing how it's grown in size.

I'll agree with you here but that is just the aura and mentally in the individual that Rolex has achieved in their marketing campaign for the past 70 some odd years.

Right, that's why at the beginning, I mentioned that I can't identify with the brand. Their uber-successful marketing campaign has made it the most recognizable and most desired brand, that's why everyone wants one, around every corner you see a guy/girl/kid wearing one or wearing a copy of one or at least ends up wanting one. Like lemmings almost.

[docnagel]

I have the great pleasure of owning both brands. Each has it's own endearing qualities, and my favorite is the one I'm wearing at that time.
Regards, Mike

[bewithabob]

I think I said it before, but I'll say it again, I like both brands. But, I respect Breitling more and I find it easier to identify with their products more than with Rolex.

I see it this way: Mass marketing -> Mass recognition -> Mass distribution -> Loss of identity

No matter what the roots of the brand are, what market niche it was intended for, once you mass market it to a broad spectrum of people, a sizable percentage from that broad spectrum will want that same product/brand, whether or not it actually suits their needs or their budget, which eventually leads to a percentage actually ending up with a product from that brand and each individual in this group, by virtue of wearing it around, markets it to others, thereby perpetuating distribution.

Once this happens, and people identify a particular product with a brand, the brand is pressured into producing something that suits a broad spectrum of people, making it as palatable to as many people as possible, thereby turning a very specific functioning product into a "vanilla" product. Something for anyone and everyone, which can also mean it's for nobody in particular.

That's why when I buy a Rolex, I don't identify with it like "this is for me." Rather, it feels like "I've arrived" like I've reached a final destination that everyone wants to get to. Like we're all in some artificial race to the finish line where we have a Rolex, a high-end car, this type of house, this type of job, income, family, wife etc...In other words, it has that superficial "vibe" or feeling of being "assimilated" that I can't quite shake off or stomach.

Unlike with Breitling where the style is so distinct that I know for a fact that not a lot of people will want one. That, in itself, makes it novel, unique, and since I'm attracted by it, it somehow validates my individuality, my own uniqueness. And that to me, is priceless.

This is an interesting opinion, but I am afraid that I will also have to disagree with you on several points.

Rolex intelligently has never mass marketed its products, although one might argue that they have dramatically expanded their distribution footprint over the past 50 years.

Their product designs were refined to drive very specific appeal to very specific market segments (divers, pilots, doctors, racing enthusiasts, Presidentsetc).

Over the years, their product team came up with noteworthy and publicity-worthy product demonstrations and partnerships ( 'the swim', 'the dive', COMEX, Daytona) that became the envy of product marketers worldwide. At the time, and even in retrospect, these marketing stunts did not make national or international headlines. But they were noticed by a select few to whom it mattered.

What has made their marketing so brilliant indeed is that it is NOT mass marketed, but rather that it is targeted to select discriminating individuals and opinion leaders who have made the brand respected and desireable among those who who can afford it, and the envy of those who can not.
That Paul Newman, Eisenhower, or a Pope made these their personal selections was the beginnning of today's big money in celebrity endorsements. Do you think anyone now cares that Tiger Woods was paid a huge sum of money to wear his brand in public to the exclusion of all others or to use his image to promote that brand?

If there was ever a brand that is certainly not ubiquitous, it is Rolex.

That you now see people from all walks of life who wear a Rolex, is not a result of mass marketing, but results from word of mouth and among people want to feel good about themselves. And so, with the fruits of their hard earned labor, they have chosen to buy a highly respected brand and wear it proudly.

If anything, your plumber and your gardener and the owner of your pool cleaning company paid a far higher percentage of their incomes to buy Rolex, than Paul Newman did back in the day.

So I am happy when I see an authentic Rolex or a Breitling on anyone's wrist, regardless of their walk of life, and feel a sense of comaraderie and cheer with them for their choice to celebrate their accomplishment.

As my grandfather told me when I was a young boy, "Man makes the money, but money does not make the man. Likewise neither applaud or begrudge a man his success, or his failures."

[uracowman]

This is an interesting opinion, but I am afraid that I will also have to disagree with you on several points.

Rolex intelligently has never mass marketed its products, although one might argue that they have dramatically expanded their distribution footprint over the past 50 years.

Their product designs were refined to drive very specific appeal to very specific market segments (divers, pilots, doctors, racing enthusiasts, Presidentsetc).

Over the years, their product team came up with noteworthy and publicity-worthy product demonstrations and partnerships ( 'the swim', 'the dive', COMEX, Daytona) that became the envy of product marketers worldwide. At the time, and even in retrospect, these marketing stunts did not make national or international headlines. But they were noticed by a select few to whom it mattered.

What has made their marketing so brilliant indeed is that it is NOT mass marketed, but rather that it is targeted to select discriminating individuals and opinion leaders who have made the brand respected and desireable among those who who can afford it, and the envy of those who can not.
That Paul Newman, Eisenhower, or a Pope made these their personal selections was the beginnning of today's big money in celebrity endorsements. Do you think anyone now cares that Tiger Woods was paid a huge sum of money to wear his brand in public to the exclusion of all others or to use his image to promote that brand?

If there was ever a brand that is certainly not ubiquitous, it is Rolex.

That you now see people from all walks of life who wear a Rolex, is not a result of mass marketing, but results from word of mouth and among people want to feel good about themselves. And so, with the fruits of their hard earned labor, they have chosen to buy a highly respected brand and wear it proudly.

If anything, your plumber and your gardener and the owner of your pool cleaning company paid a far higher percentage of their incomes to buy Rolex, than Paul Newman did back in the day.

So I am happy when I see an authentic Rolex or a Breitling on anyone's wrist, regardless of their walk of life, and feel a sense of comaraderie and cheer with them for their choice to celebrate their accomplishment.

As my grandfather told me when I was a young boy, "Man makes the money, but money does not make the man. Likewise neither applaud or begrudge a man his success, or his failures."
They HAVEN'T mass marketed? Think about every single equestrian event, tennis event, higher end magazines and commercials just to name a few.

Mass marketing IS the reason why people choose to buy a certain product over another. That is one of the basics they teach you in any marketing class you take at the high school, college or graduate level. A great example of this are golf clubs. Look at a company like Nike for example. When someone walk into a Golfsmith to look at a new driver or a set of irons, what is the first brand they usually go to? 9 out of 10 times, it is a mass marketed brand such as Nike or Callaway. People don't realize that there are brands out there that make comparable quality or better products than the mass marketed brands. An example of this is Mizuno. As a golfer, Mizuno irons are the best irons I have ever hit in my life yet they aren't as well advertised as many of the bigger name brands that you see all over the web and on the television.

Go out and ask people what they believe a fine watch brand is regardless of whether or not they know anything about watches or not. Almost every person will have Rolex in their list of two to three brands which they feel is a superior brand.

[lorsban]

Well said.

Lets also not forget the impact of watches in movies. I remember buying a seamaster after seeing james bond.

[bewithabob]

They HAVEN'T mass marketed? Think about every single equestrian event, tennis event, higher end magazines and commercials just to name a few.

Mass marketing IS the reason why people choose to buy a certain product over another. That is one of the basics they teach you in any marketing class you take at the high school, college or graduate level. A great example of this are golf clubs. Look at a company like Nike for example. When someone walk into a Golfsmith to look at a new driver or a set of irons, what is the first brand they usually go to? 9 out of 10 times, it is a mass marketed brand such as Nike or Callaway. People don't realize that there are brands out there that make comparable quality or better products than the mass marketed brands. An example of this is Mizuno. As a golfer, Mizuno irons are the best irons I have ever hit in my life yet they aren't as well advertised as many of the bigger name brands that you see all over the web and on the television.

Go out and ask people what they believe a fine watch brand is regardless of whether or not they know anything about watches or not. Almost every person will have Rolex in their list of two to three brands which they feel is a superior brand.

Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.

[lorsban]

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

Ah totally forgot that it was a book series first. Thanks for the reminder. Sort of like Breguet coming out in Count of Monte Cristo and some other classic (not sure if it was Around the world in 80 days or 20,000 leagues).

I suppose its really Omega that used Bond more for marketting.

Still, I do see Rolex and Tag being in the same publications does that mean they're after the same markets?

[uracowman]

Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.

I'll agree with just about everything you said but you have to realize that the target market they advertise to causes them to indirectly advertise to the general public a.k.a the masses.

[Double_J]

Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.

It seems that you're arguing semantics more than anything else.

The context of Lorsban's post doesn't seem to ding Rolex for it's 'mass marketing' per se. Rather, it seems to ding Rolex for a move away from it's 'tool watch' heritage - something that Breitling has thus far resisted (moreso than Rolex, at least).

Your assertion that Rolex ads target those at 'the pinnacle' of their profession reinforces this notion that Rolex marketing has shifted the brand image towards one of prestige and success rather than pure functionality for a specific purpose. I would assume that this was done to broaden the appeal of the brand to all takers. I suppose this could be construed as 'mass marketing' (relatively speaking, that is).

I personally think that Rolex has a very smart marketing machine behind it. Bully for us - helps to keep up those resale values!

[CKLinLA]

While some of us might be nice to think that in owning a Rolex we are
among some select few with sufficient taste/money/success/etc to own
one, truth is Rolex sells a lot lot LOT more watches than many other
'mass market' brands like Breitling or Tag.

Lots of nice watches, buy/wear/enjoy what you like

[bewithabob]

I'll agree with just about everything you said but you have to realize that the target market they advertise to causes them to indirectly advertise to the general public a.k.a the masses.

The strategy of marketing to opinion leaders , pays huge dividends. That is the beauty of it.

Thus celebrity spokespersons are not always chosen just for their ability to get attention, but because they have authority and credibility beyond their areas of expertise .

So, would Tiger be a better spokesperson for golf clubs,:thumbsup: Viagra, :rofl: a sex addiction clinic:thumbsup: or car insurance:clap:? What qualifies him to be a spokesman for Tag or Buick?:crying::crying::crying:

[rr-nyc]

Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you.

Dozens of Rolex billboards along major interstates, in airports, at train stations and full page ad in virtually every Sunday NY Times long and every fashion magazine in publication IS mass marketing and indiscriminate to say the least.

Its similar to Mercedes-Benz. While they may sponsor "wealthy" events like auto racing and tennis, they advertise in every media possible. In fact, I would argue against your example of Walmart. Their advertisements are extremely targeted toward budget conscious consumers.

PS- The global per capita income is just shy over $8000 USD per year. Its safe to say that less than 1% of the global population makes $200,000 per year, not 5%

[CKLinLA]

PS- The global per capita income is just shy over $8000 USD per year. Its safe to say that less than 1% of the global population makes $200,000 per year, not 5%


I suspect that the global per capita annual income is a closer to US$800
than $8000. Of the two biggest countries, China is at $3,200 while
India is at $1000. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita ]
(Its about $45,000 in the USA.)
Less than 1% over $200K is a pretty safe guess.

[rr-nyc]

I suspect that the global per capita annual income is a closer to US$800
than $8000. Of the two biggest countries, China is at $3,200 while
India is at $1000. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita ]
(Its about $45,000 in the USA.)
Less than 1% over $200K is a pretty safe guess.

Thanks but I was citing the PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) method which is the most widely accepted way of comparing per capita incomes by adjusting them for cost of living, etc. This is used by the CIA Factbook

[bewithabob]

I too see outdoor billboards in Dallas; these are not placed by Rolex, but by the local AD Bachendorf's. Chances are you will see likewise that the local ads results from less sophisticated ADs in the areas. Those same ADs are also advertising otherbrands, such as Omega, Breitling and the AD owns a 12 month contract on the board, but rotates other attention-getting brands into their schedule to off set the costs with advertising co-op money.... These guys use outdoor because they havent discovered the means to access more targetted and efficient methods to reach the higher income areas. Also, those areas are in poockets, butt he AD may be miles away. So the get their store brand recognized in those pockets, they but outdoor which reaches a are broad and inefficient market with pllenty fo waste circulation.

[CKLinLA]

PPP doesn't work with Rolex pricing. The use (or non use) of PPP adjustment
is controversial and often dictated by the user's stance on trade policy and
economic/development aid.

Thanks but I was citing the PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) method which is the most widely accepted way of comparing per capita incomes by adjusting them for cost of living, etc. This is used by the CIA Factbook

[rr-nyc]

PPP doesn't work with Rolex pricing. The use (or non use) of PPP adjustment
is controversial and often dictated by the user's stance on trade policy and
economic/development aid.

Nobody is using it for Rolex pricing. I used the PPP average per capita income of 6 Billion people living in the various countries and economies because its the most widely accepted way of calculating such a number.

[iDamo4u]

I agree. Not only is the Pro I more comfortable IMO, I like the look of it a lot better than the Pro II. Again, II seems more dressy which is not the look I'm going for when I sport a watch like a Breitling.



Yep. I eventually bought a Skyland Avenger Blacksteel as the DLC finish was awesome. I liked pretty much everything about the watch except one minor point. The hands just seemed too plain to me and pretty thin...hence the lume wasn't very good (actually, the lume of the markers was pretty week too due to their small size).

Those knocks aside, I was planning on keep the watch for at least a year until I was going to flip to purchase a DSSD (the boss, aka wife, wasn't going to authorize more expansion to my collection in terms of numbers)...but sure enough about a month after I bought it I found a DSSD and had to purchase (this was over a year ago when it wasn't very easy to find a DSSD). So, the Breitling didn't stay in the collection too long. I'm sure I'll get another soon as I've seen a few w/ their new collection that look promising via pictures. :cheers:

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/12-1.jpg

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/14-1.jpg

SA vs Sub Date lume:
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k228/lightning33/IMG_1773.jpg


I got exactly the Skyland avenger and omega seamaster like you but just no Rolex, they are great watch ya... is really base on "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" :)

[Big Joe]

I have 2 Rolex watches and 2 Breitlings, as well as an Omega, and a Tag. I love them all. All these watches are tools to me. However, they do each look and feel different. The Breitlings are the best for low light viewability of any watch I've seen. The detail, and fit and finish of the Breitling is incredible and I think a step above the others. They are more concerned about the engineering and functional aspect than the fashion aspect.

Rolex is still my favorite, not because it is better, just because I like them. However, my Breitling is more comfortable and seems sturdier. Any of these watches would last anyone for a lifetime with proper care. They are all very accurate (with the exception of my GMTII, which just back back from service, so we will see how it does now). They all look good, and they all are very comfortable to wear.

Rolex and Breitling are not the same, but each is still as incredible as the other!

[lorsban]

that screams diversity??? Reallly??? Simply changing the bezel and dial color does not show diversity. Rolex has two watch styles...period, the Submariner style and the datejust style. Every watch looks exactly like one of those two watches with very minor detail diferences. Not a whole lot of diversity.

Like Harley. Few engines and frames, many many models.

Compare Harley to any of the Japanese brands and you immediately see the difference. The Japanese offer you many very distinct models and they try to compete with every range, developing flagships from cruisers, sportsbikes, trail bikes etc...With Harley, you have just the one, but they're making a killing with it.

It's highly commendable that both Harley and Rolex are able to focus on such few model lines and yet, are able to develop such a huge following. Very risky business model for sure since you're basically putting all your eggs in one basket.

I'm actually amazed with the DJ shape/line in particular. From that one shape, you have a range of sizes and "models" from small, mid, AK, DJ, Explorer, Milgauss, DDII.

[Big Joe]

I have both. I own a Rolex Sub blue face, two tone and a GMT II black face two tone. I love both, but the GMT is my favorite watch. I also have a Breitling Navitimer World with leather strap and a Chronomat Evolution with gray face and sub dials in SS with bracelet. The Chrono Evo is the most comfortable of the bunch on the wrist. They are all very accurate. The Breitling far surpasses anything else for low light visibility. If I were a pilot the ability to read the Breitling in the cabin with low light would make the Chrono jump heads and tails above the others.

The Navitimer World and the GMT II both have GMT functions which I love. The Navitimer is quite a bit bigger and is probably why I like the Rolex better.

That being said, my Omega Seamaster is the most comfortable watch I've ever worn. My oldest son is borrowing it currently. I also have a Tag Huer Monaco and I really love that watch as well. It has a mineral crystal so I do not wear it when I may damage it. The Rolex watches always look good, and work well. The Breitlings always look good and work very, very well. More bling with Rolex but the Breitling is the chief when it comes to function and useability.

I think the other reason I like my Rolex a bit better is emotional. I waited 30 years to get my Sub and a few more to get my GMT. In addition, if you want to impress someone the Rolex will do that. Most people don't know the difference in the others or a Fossil. They don't work better than the other watches, but I probably wear the GMT 1/2 the time, the Sub 1/4, and the others the rest of the time. All great watches to be sure.

[mywifespissed]

Breitling actually tests every movement they make, not just a sampling of them. I find them #3, with Rolex being #2 and Panerai being #1.

I imagine you mean among sporty watches. Because the world is filled with way more exclusive, and completely hand-finished and hand-built watches than Rolex or Breitling. Rolex is so overproduced, like Porsche, it surprises me they still turn heads. The good fakes are getting better and better too, making the real thing almost impossible to spot at a glance. I do like the Rolex brand, and have one now and have had many in the past. But if I could afford it, a Breguet, Vacheron or Patek would be a finer and more interesting watch to own, IMO. Also, as a watchmaker, over the last three years or so I have seen five seperate Rolex watches that have had scarred movements as a result of screws backing out. With no other brand except "mushroom" wanna-be luxury brands have I seen this. And I'm refering to virgin Rolex movements i.e. watches less than 10 years old and never serviced. I think it's because Rolex polishes the entire screw including the threads, which makes them slippery and prone to backing out. And they MUST lose that weight axle. In ten to fifteen years it's shot, and tends to leave marks on the autowinding bridge. Use ball bearings like most other brands.

[lorsban]

Also, as a watchmaker, over the last three years or so I have seen five seperate Rolex watches that have had scarred movements as a result of screws backing out.

This happened to my dad's and bros Rolexes. Not mine but then again, the Rolex isn't my daily wearer, it's their main watch tho.

[cmr]

it's funny that you make that analogy because I used to road race sportbikes and find Harley boring and useless for me...they all look the same, poor performance and poor handling. But people are taught they are a great bike when in reality they are a P.O.S. Just because they make a lot of money and have great marketing does not make them a good bike. No matter how old I get, I still love the the Japanese bikes.

let me know the next time you see a 75 year old japanese bike sell for 50,000.00. you are in a minority with your belief, a harley is like a zippo lighter, when it quites working you fix it and use it your whole life, a japanese bike is like a bic lighter, when it gets old and quites you just throw it in the trash and buy a new one. sorry brother.... nice try. :cheers:

[rr-nyc]

let me know the next time you see a 75 year old japanese bike sell for 50,000.00. you are in a minority with your belief, a harley is like a zippo lighter, when it quites working you fix it and use it your whole life, a japanese bike is like a bic lighter, when it gets old and quites you just throw it in the trash and buy a new one. sorry brother.... nice try. :cheers:

I actually laughed out loud reading that response.

This may be a surprise to most Harley owners... Not everyone finds those bikes attractive and even more are repulsed by the noise coming from those attention deprived people that feel the need to rev the engine while sitting at the light. IMO, they sound like when the vacuum hose on my BMW cracked... in other words, like crap.

As far as finding 75 year old jap bike that sells for $50k, give me a break. I can show you a candle holder for $450k so whats your point? Sorry to say that if the rest of the world could make the correlation of Zippo to Harley and Harley to Rolex, Rolex would probably be out of business.

[rolexplorer2]

Passed the AD for both Rolex and Breitling yesterday, in fact the watches were side by side. The first observation is, how shiny and blingy the Breitlings are compared to Rolex watches. Some models are nice, but it's in the name, Bright-ling. Too shiny by far.

[cmr]

I actually laughed out loud reading that response.

This may be a surprise to most Harley owners... Not everyone finds those bikes attractive and even more are repulsed by the noise coming from those attention deprived people that feel the need to rev the engine while sitting at the light. IMO, they sound like when the vacuum hose on my BMW cracked... in other words, like crap.

As far as finding 75 year old jap bike that sells for $50k, give me a break. I can show you a candle holder for $450k so whats your point? Sorry to say that if the rest of the world could make the correlation of Zippo to Harley and Harley to Rolex, Rolex would probably be out of business.

as you wish but you should really come out of that bubble you live in. you missed the 75 year old bike analogy altogether.... the japanese didn't make them 75 years ago. they have no heritage or history anybody cares about that translates into passion. the only passion for those kind of bikes is whats coming out next year. last years model is long forgotten hence the crappy resale value. face it man, nobody gives a damn about a 1969 honda.

you can believe what you wish just don't try to sell it to me, i have been building bikes for 35 years and i know what people are interested in spending their money on.

[rr-nyc]

as you wish but you should really come out of that bubble you live in. you missed the 75 year old bike analogy altogether.... the japanese didn't make them 75 years ago. they have no heritage or history anybody cares about that translates into passion. the only passion for those kind of bikes is whats coming out next year. last years model is long forgotten hence the crappy resale value. face it man, nobody gives a damn about a 1969 honda.

you can believe what you wish just don't try to sell it to me, i have been building bikes for 35 years and i know what people are interested in spending their money on.

Bubble I'm living in? I'm as pragmatic as they come. I like the things I like yet appreciate differing opinions. Look at yourself in the mirror because in a matter of a couple of sentences, you have defined your entire existence as my-world-is-the-only-world.

So based on your brilliant theory of time/heritage=passion, can you tell all of us where Oldsmobile stands compared to Ferrari and Porsche?

Personally, I don't give a crap about a Honda or a Harley. Can I appreciate a Honda? absolutely. Can I appreciate a Harley? I did until sharing this chat with you.

[cmr]

Bubble I'm living in? I'm as pragmatic as they come. I like the things I like yet appreciate differing opinions. Look at yourself in the mirror because in a matter of a couple of sentences, you have defined your entire existence as my-world-is-the-only-world.

So based on your brilliant theory of time/heritage=passion, can you tell all of us where Oldsmobile stands compared to Ferrari and Porsche?

Personally, I don't give a crap about a Honda or a Harley. Can I appreciate a Honda? absolutely. Can I appreciate a Harley? I did until sharing this chat with you.


as you wish...... if that is all you comprehended out of what i posted i give up. :cheers:

[mywifespissed]

Oh oh, watch out! :justkiddi

They are in my opinion the pinnacle of successful marketing campaigns - and have been so for many many years.

It's like that old saying; "people don't buy products, they buy stories"

Cheers,
Joe

Yup, all the luxury stuff we buy is simply an attempt to get a "high" from our own brain chemicals. The richer and more sophisticated you become, the harder it is to get those chemical pumps turned on.

[warp_foo]

Where else would you get a Breitling and Omega? At a shop in a mall.

I bought both my Omega and Breitlings from an AD located inside a mall.

Breitlings have style and function as well.

I purchased both of my Rolex watches at a mall. Your point?

m

[cmr]

I purchased both of my Rolex watches at a mall. Your point?

m

bought my gmt2c and ss daytona at a mall.

[Puffy]

Do not look Breitling at all. Far too blingy

[multimedia]

Do not look Breitling at all. Far too blingy

So, just look away then... :smokin: :thumbsup:


:justkiddi

Cheers,
Joe

[crossplatform]

Personally they're both good, but the problem is marketing. Rolex is seen as the ultimate watch for success and wealth, if these other companies would attack that marketing with their own it could change. Omega was once the most popular brand before Rolex got marketed well.

[toddb]

Typically rolex seems 2 have higher resale and mystique
omega is down there with tag ......

[wisguy]

I own 2 Rolex and 1 Breitling, very different brands in my opinion and difficult to compare.

To each their own...

[Sixxgrand1]

Well after numerous Omega's, Breitling's, Rolex, Ulysse Nardin, SINN and IWC, the last four remaining watches in my stable are two Rolex and two Breitling's.
EXP I
EXP II
Aerospace
B-1

[tachif]

U know what?? Have them both !!! Amazing watches....

[stusrt]

I have a gmt iic, skyland, and planet ocean

I love all 3

Rolex has nothing to compete with the skyland
the gmt iic is the best investment
but the planet ocean is the most watch for your money

hope that settles the whole debate

[LuxuryWatchCollector]

Rolex remain the quintessential icon for success. We men turn 40 and flood into the Rolex and Mercedes dealers seeking the socially endorsed trappings of success.

I feel any well rounded collection must contain at least one Rolex piece just as surely as it should contain a Breitling piece. The Navitimer design has proven just as timeless as the Submariner.

All this is my long winded way of saying ..........buy both !

[Sponon]

With Breitling, it is one of the few brands in the world that puts EVERY watch they make through COSC certification, the ONLY company in the world to do it with quartz watches.

I was under the impression that Sinn also puts quartz movements through COSC.

Copy/paste from Sinn:
The most modern and precise chronometer quartz movement on the market, ETA 955.652-Movement, keeps the UX’s time, more than fulfilling the especially strict new Swiss chronometer norms for quartz movements. The temperature-stabilized movement is powered by a lithium ion battery, which not only has an exceptionally long life, but can also supply electricity at minus temperatures of up to -25° Celsius.

[clubbyjones]

I have spent far too much time in my life thinking about this exact question. Literally, I've spent days thinking about this (made me think I had OCD!!) I'm going to try to sum it up as directly and objectively as possible.

I've owned 13 different Rolex models and 9 Breitling models in the past four years.

First off, let's be clear that these are the two most recognized luxury watch companies in the US. Forget IWC, Tag, or even Omega, if you were going to open up a higher end watch store these would be the first two companies you would talk to in order to maximize the number of customers that would come in the store. This is why jewelers put pictures of Rolexes on billboards and have their name next to the giant Breitling ad in the magazines.

So after leaving out comparisons to other brands, lets leave out the marketing campaigns as well. Car and Driver does not post the commercials for the cars in their comparison tests, and as "watch nuts" we should do the same with our obsessions. It would be more appropriate to comment on the target audience OF the marketing rather than the marketing itself, similar to how Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Hammond comment on the typical drivers of the cars rather than the commercials and advertising styles of the companies.

Now, let's look at how exactly each company changes their watches over the years:
http://people.timezone.com/breitling/bfaq/gallery/images/aerospace_2.jpg
http://www.designertimepieceforless.com/images/breitling-aerospace.jpg
http://www.dexclusive.com/graphics/00000001/BRE-E7936210-B781.jpg

vs.

http://www.interwatches.com/rolex-gmt-master-1675-image-25511-126411-bg.jpg
http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/articles/gmt2.jpg
http://www.worldtempus.com/uploads/RTEmagicC_09_0605_Broer_rolex.jpg.jpg

I picked these two models because these are, in my book, two "tool" watches. On the Breitling side, I see radical bracelet changes. On the Rolex side, I see the same bracelet (except the polish linked on the IIc, which many people have restored to the original brushed finish anyways). Both have a similar amount of facelifts over the years, which I don't think anyone thinks is a bad thing. I like the fact that the GMT IIc I'm wearing is quite similar to the original GMT designed for airline pilots in the 50s. This is probably because the bracelet design is not only sturdy, but TIMELESS. I don't think anyone can look at the earlier bracelets of the Breitling above and say it's "timeless". (If you disagree, I'd love to see a high-end watch company with a similar bracelet on a current model watch). Rolex comes ahead in this department due to their lack of changes over the years. "I don't mind a watch that constantly drastically changes" is a horrible argument; with drastic changes come 1) higher repair costs due to the lack of production of parts due to old products being phased out, 2) a less number of second-hand/used/extra parts on the internet from less years of manufacturing, and 3) a steep decline in value (will be mentioned more later).

To be fair, I do understand that Breitling has watches like the Navitimer which have not changed as much, but then again I didn't bring it up because I can easily bring up the Rolex Submariner which even with a ceramic improvement still looks nearly the exact same. There is a link right here (http://people.timezone.com/breitling/bfaq/Image_Gallery.html) that has tons of shots of the different Breitlings over the years. Take a look at Rolexes over the same time period and compare for yourself.




Moving on, let's talk about what's inside these watches. Breitling uses lots of outsourced movements. Is that a bad thing? No. Is it a good thing? Yes, but not for Breitling. It's great for Swiss Army, etc, who also use the ETA/Valjoux movements and can say "Some Breitlings use the same movement". However, Breitling does not advertise "we tinkered a movement available in a $200 watch". When I bought a Lexus, I never heard the salesman tell me that the same engine is used in a current Toyota model. Infiniti used the same G35 engine in the FX35 and M35, and now uses the G37 engine in the M37. Also, swing by the Nissan dealer to see that those engines are in new models too.

Again, I'll stress THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. Go with what works right? Nissan/Infiniti and Toyota/Lexus make reliable cars. But people buy the Lexus and Infiniti over the lower lines because of the added features and different exteriors: just like Breitling owners over other swiss brands. Leave cost and status out of it, it's irrelevant.

Now, go check out a BMW dealership- they advertise that every part of their car is BMW and BMW only. To those who say this is not a good thing or "it doesn't matter", well I disagree. I was watching a thing on the BBC comparing bakeries in London...and the narrator expressed her anger at how a local bakery was taking pre-mixed bread from a grocery store, cooking it, and selling it for an exponential multiple of the cost. Does that not appall you? How about Aquafina using tapwater in their bottled water? When the majority of people pay good money for something, they like to feel like it was worth it. I don't feel that way when I pay thousands of dollars for a Breitling or Panerai or any other watch with a widely distributed movement. This is because there is really no different in outcome. If there was a difference in quality/reliability of the movements, then this whole argument would be shot.

In the Lexus/BMW argument, I am really starting to prefer Lexus because its my experience that my Lexus cars are more reliable. My BMWs seem to have more problems, despite everything being "in-house". But Rolex and Breitling are different...both are COSC certified and incredibly reliable. Therefore, I think the edge in this argument also goes to Rolex.




I realized I said "money" a lot in that last point. To me, long-term value IS important in a watch. Look on ebay or any watch forum...how come Breitling value as a percentage of MSRP is significantly lower than the Rolex value? Part of it is the company itself and their policies, but the majority is the result of the points I highlighted above. I just mentioned BMW's keep their value more over time than any other company. Is this a coincidence? No, it's the combination of a less drastic change in models over the years and a history of universal, all in-house construction. No one likes depreciation, some people just care less about it than others. Therefore, Rolex wins in this department as well.


To me, Rolex is all around a better watch. After all this thought, there is almost no comparison at all. So in the answer to the argument "Breitling vs. Rolex", Rolex is a CLEAR winner when you look at it objectively. When you take in subjectivity, such as "Breitling is too blingy" or "everyone has a Rolex" or "______ advertises too much or too lame", then everyone has their own opinions. Status should be irrelevant too; we are watch nuts, not socialites. Either of these watches on your wrist signifies you have either a) some discretionary income or b) asinine priorities. With these companies, the "status" is in the cash value, i.e. a Breitling Bentley is "better" than a datejust and a Daytona is "better" than a Colt GMT. I feel this is common sense whatever your social circle may be.

So while I love my Rolexes, I bought my dad a Breitling Bentley GT and my mom a Chrono Cockpit. They both loved the look of each one and I feel that it was money well spent. So while they don't care for the Rolex product line, they will never say Breitling is a better watch. Because it's not. :cheers:

[moby33]

Wow...I would hate to think what it would look like if you didn't sum it up so "directly"!

I have spent far too much time in my life thinking about this exact question. Literally, I've spent days thinking about this (made me think I had OCD!!) I'm going to try to sum it up as directly and objectively as possible.

I've owned 13 different Rolex models and 9 Breitling models in the past four years.

First off, let's be clear that these are the two most recognized luxury watch companies in the US. Forget IWC, Tag, or even Omega, if you were going to open up a higher end watch store these would be the first two companies you would talk to in order to maximize the number of customers that would come in the store. This is why jewelers put pictures of Rolexes on billboards and have their name next to the giant Breitling ad in the magazines.

So after leaving out comparisons to other brands, lets leave out the marketing campaigns as well. Car and Driver does not post the commercials for the cars in their comparison tests, and as "watch nuts" we should do the same with our obsessions. It would be more appropriate to comment on the target audience OF the marketing rather than the marketing itself, similar to how Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Hammond comment on the typical drivers of the cars rather than the commercials and advertising styles of the companies.

Now, let's look at how exactly each company changes their watches over the years:

I picked these two models because these are, in my book, two "tool" watches. On the Breitling side, I see radical bracelet changes. On the Rolex side, I see the same bracelet (except the polish linked on the IIc, which many people have restored to the original brushed finish anyways). Both have a similar amount of facelifts over the years, which I don't think anyone thinks is a bad thing. I like the fact that the GMT IIc I'm wearing is quite similar to the original GMT designed for airline pilots in the 50s. This is probably because the bracelet design is not only sturdy, but TIMELESS. I don't think anyone can look at the earlier bracelets of the Breitling above and say it's "timeless". (If you disagree, I'd love to see a high-end watch company with a similar bracelet on a current model watch). Rolex comes ahead in this department due to their lack of changes over the years. "I don't mind a watch that constantly drastically changes" is a horrible argument; with drastic changes come 1) higher repair costs due to the lack of production of parts due to old products being phased out, 2) a less number of second-hand/used/extra parts on the internet from less years of manufacturing, and 3) a steep decline in value (will be mentioned more later).

To be fair, I do understand that Breitling has watches like the Navitimer which have not changed as much, but then again I didn't bring it up because I can easily bring up the Rolex Submariner which even with a ceramic improvement still looks nearly the exact same. There is a link right here (http://people.timezone.com/breitling/bfaq/Image_Gallery.html) that has tons of shots of the different Breitlings over the years. Take a look at Rolexes over the same time period and compare for yourself.




Moving on, let's talk about what's inside these watches. Breitling uses lots of outsourced movements. Is that a bad thing? No. Is it a good thing? Yes, but not for Breitling. It's great for Swiss Army, etc, who also use the ETA/Valjoux movements and can say "Some Breitlings use the same movement". However, Breitling does not advertise "we tinkered a movement available in a $200 watch". When I bought a Lexus, I never heard the salesman tell me that the same engine is used in a current Toyota model. Infiniti used the same G35 engine in the FX35 and M35, and now uses the G37 engine in the M37. Also, swing by the Nissan dealer to see that those engines are in new models too.

Again, I'll stress THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. Go with what works right? Nissan/Infiniti and Toyota/Lexus make reliable cars. But people buy the Lexus and Infiniti over the lower lines because of the added features and different exteriors: just like Breitling owners over other swiss brands. Leave cost and status out of it, it's irrelevant.

Now, go check out a BMW dealership- they advertise that every part of their car is BMW and BMW only. To those who say this is not a good thing or "it doesn't matter", well I disagree. I was watching a thing on the BBC comparing bakeries in London...and the narrator expressed her anger at how a local bakery was taking pre-mixed bread from a grocery store, cooking it, and selling it for an exponential multiple of the cost. Does that not appall you? How about Aquafina using tapwater in their bottled water? When the majority of people pay good money for something, they like to feel like it was worth it. I don't feel that way when I pay thousands of dollars for a Breitling or Panerai or any other watch with a widely distributed movement. This is because there is really no different in outcome. If there was a difference in quality/reliability of the movements, then this whole argument would be shot.

In the Lexus/BMW argument, I am really starting to prefer Lexus because its my experience that my Lexus cars are more reliable. My BMWs seem to have more problems, despite everything being "in-house". But Rolex and Breitling are different...both are COSC certified and incredibly reliable. Therefore, I think the edge in this argument also goes to Rolex.




I realized I said "money" a lot in that last point. To me, long-term value IS important in a watch. Look on ebay or any watch forum...how come Breitling value as a percentage of MSRP is significantly lower than the Rolex value? Part of it is the company itself and their policies, but the majority is the result of the points I highlighted above. I just mentioned BMW's keep their value more over time than any other company. Is this a coincidence? No, it's the combination of a less drastic change in models over the years and a history of universal, all in-house construction. No one likes depreciation, some people just care less about it than others. Therefore, Rolex wins in this department as well.


To me, Rolex is all around a better watch. After all this thought, there is almost no comparison at all. So in the answer to the argument "Breitling vs. Rolex", Rolex is a CLEAR winner when you look at it objectively. When you take in subjectivity, such as "Breitling is too blingy" or "everyone has a Rolex" or "______ advertises too much or too lame", then everyone has their own opinions. Status should be irrelevant too; we are watch nuts, not socialites. Either of these watches on your wrist signifies you have either a) some discretionary income or b) asinine priorities. With these companies, the "status" is in the cash value, i.e. a Breitling Bentley is "better" than a datejust and a Daytona is "better" than a Colt GMT. I feel this is common sense whatever your social circle may be.

So while I love my Rolexes, I bought my dad a Breitling Bentley GT and my mom a Chrono Cockpit. They both loved the look of each one and I feel that it was money well spent. So while they don't care for the Rolex product line, they will never say Breitling is a better watch. Because it's not. :cheers:

[sleddog]

Boy oh boy this is an old thread that won't die....:chuckle:

So many varying opinions on the topic...and understandable!! A huge following for both examples with a deep history on both sides!!

That said,and as I said in post 44,it's apples and oranges people!! Both make a great watch,but that's where it ends....Each brand is in their own league with different tastes and asthetics....let's agree to disagree!! and co-exist together.:thumbsup::cheers:

[C. Davidson]

Could be wrong, but I think this is a general breakdown of points of sale in the US: (this keeps the exclusivity angle in perspective)

Breitling = 300
Rolex = 800

I love both brands.

And thanks to clubbyjones for your post, very informative.

[BarkMaster]

I've always liked the Breitling line for large, agressive looking watches.

I wouldn't mind owning one or two, for sure. :thumbsup:

But in the end, I saved my money for a Rolex. :read:

[Sixxgrand1]

I own both. Love them both. Different approaches - both winners. Owned 5 Omega's - fell out of love with them all.

[bannedalso]

Moving on, let's talk about what's inside these watches. Breitling uses lots of outsourced movements. Is that a bad thing? No. Is it a good thing? Yes, but not for Breitling. It's great for Swiss Army, etc, who also use the ETA/Valjoux movements and can say "Some Breitlings use the same movement". However, Breitling does not advertise "we tinkered a movement available in a $200 watch". When I bought a Lexus, I never heard the salesman tell me that the same engine is used in a current Toyota model. Infiniti used the same G35 engine in the FX35 and M35, and now uses the G37 engine in the M37. Also, swing by the Nissan dealer to see that those engines are in new models too.

Again, I'll stress THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. Go with what works right? Nissan/Infiniti and Toyota/Lexus make reliable cars. But people buy the Lexus and Infiniti over the lower lines because of the added features and different exteriors: just like Breitling owners over other swiss brands. Leave cost and status out of it, it's irrelevant.


A lot of Breitling movements are BASED on ETA or Valjoux but are actually PRODUCED in house to meet the demand and quality control demanded by Breitling...most people don't know that.

[James M]

My Superocean feels more substantial than my Sub but doesn't have that special feel the Sub does and I never wear it now.

I miss my Navitimer, I had a Montbrillant Datora for a few years and that was a beautifully made watch.

[007Sub]

I just bought a Breitling I've always been fond of: a 2002 Blackbird Special Edition. Its the one with the particularly sharp angled bracelet links and grooves in the bezel.

In many ways, its very much like my sub: Matte black dial, Brushed Stailess Steel. Sporty yet refined. BUT in many ways its very different. I love my sub and do beleive that its the worlds perfect watch, however, i find the breitling filling a different type of watch owning experience. First; im enjoying the fact that it has a chronometer function. Also, i like how heavy it is. The watch feels substantial; and looks very masculine. I like that.

Though the sub in actuality is probably a tougher watch, the Breitling gives off the appearance and feel of being stronger and more durable. I also like the anti-reflective coating Breitling puts on their crystals.

Still, at the end of the day, the Rolex Submariner... is ... well the Rolex Submariner; An icon... A watch that has been copied and emulated for over 50 years. Moreover, like Porsche, I like the fact that Rolex took one design and more or less stuck with it, making only slight adjustments through the years (though i hate the gloss dials on the new watches). I admire the fact that they respect their heritage and tradition.

This Breitling model was only made for 2 years in this particular (angular) form. A shame that they didn't stick with it. The new Blackbird is pretty ugly in my oppinion.

Anyway, here are some photos of these two matte dial, SS titans:

[Navitimer]

I own many Breitling watches, used to be 15,5 Omegas and 3 Tags. I tried hard to buy Rolex, just could not buy even one because Rolex Replica looks as good as the real Rolex. I respect Rolex, but when Rolex dealer complemented my replica Rolex as a great watch, I just could not spend a few thousands on that brand....

If Rolex offer varieties of designs I may consider Rolex, but after all, Rolex are well respected Brand

[joeyk]

:twit::comeandge:comeandge

[lowendbassshop]

Hey guys, I'm new here. I noticed people keep saying that Breitling is offered everywhere verse Rolex, but I find it the other way around. I can find Rolex everywhere but Breitling is harder to find. I'm in Nashville, so maybe that it....

I own a couple Breitlings and have bought Rolex's but not hung onto them. I think they are all great pieces.

[blackmsport]

I own many Breitling watches, used to be 15,5 Omegas and 3 Tags. I tried hard to buy Rolex, just could not buy even one because Rolex Replica looks as good as the real Rolex. I respect Rolex, but when Rolex dealer complemented my replica Rolex as a great watch, I just could not spend a few thousands on that brand....

If Rolex offer varieties of designs I may consider Rolex, but after all, Rolex are well respected Brand

what !!!!! you have a fake Rolex

BAN LIST

[jeremyam]

with the expection of 2 or three models, in particular the SOH 38 and SOH 46, i don't have any affinity towards breitling. i don't do aviation, i don't fly and i don't need function over function. i prefer clean look, brushed ss, clean dial and rolex does that very well, breitling on the other hand appeals to those who don't mind a "busier" look every time they glance at watch...

Having said that both are nice watches and i tend to agree with rolex being better at resale and breitling being a better value. i think omega bridges the gap between the aforementioned perfectly with tag heuer following closely.

Just my opinion.

J

[blackmsport]

I like Breitling avenger or steelfish chrono

the rest are just too bulky and too complicated dial

[toddb]

A k a new galactic 41 . One of breitlings' best products, overlooked {sadly}..big double date wheel, great legibility, and excellent bracelet. Reasonably priced; as well...

[blackmsport]

wow.... best looking Breitling

[toddb]

Its true, mate .... everyone gets so caught up in the toaster-oven sized chronos...they overlook this excellent piece

[Blimms]

The Super Avenger is Sweet !! :cheers:

[Mantooth]

Rolex, Omega, Breitling, in that order.

I can't get over Breitling's styling. :thinking:

[Bigboss]

I own Rolex/Breitling/Omega.

Luv them all.

Cheers
Walter

[lowendbassshop]

Rolex, Omega, Breitling, in that order.

I can't get over Breitling's styling. :thinking:

I don't understand why this statement is made when Breitling makes a variety of styles.

Just wondering why Rolex owners always try and throw Breitling down to the third spot when they list the order... unless they own Both then they always name them side by side. I don't drive a Hummer nor own a Rolex :justkiddi

But I do enjoy watches and how they are designed and built with quality..

Why is Panerai never mentioned.... just a different class?

I enjoy Breitling and Panerai, but I obviously like weight and something I can feel on.

Thanks guys for the wonderful forum to discuss such fine time pieces.

[panxiaoyan]

Hi guys, rolex and breitling got different style and both making different type of watch and design and i think both of them cannnot be compare to each other , i love the breitling chronograph like super avenger , chronomat evolution , bentley gt and for rolex of course will be DEEPSEA, submariner and gmt2 . in terms of price , i think breitling is more better value for money for those of us that wanted to keep alot of watch . if i have the money , i will try different brand of watch. thats just my opinion and the trend nowadays is all bout 40mm size no matter if you got a big wrist or small wrist. i got a super small wrist. thank

[panxiaoyan]

I don't understand why this statement is made when Breitling makes a variety of styles.

Just wondering why Rolex owners always try and throw Breitling down to the third spot when they list the order... unless they own Both then they always name them side by side. I don't drive a Hummer nor own a Rolex :justkiddi

But I do enjoy watches and how they are designed and built with quality..

Why is Panerai never mentioned.... just a different class?

I enjoy Breitling and Panerai, but I obviously like weight and something I can feel on.

Thanks guys for the wonderful forum to discuss such fine time pieces.

agree, both of them make different style and target different audience and i think at the end of the day is which one u prefer most , i highly like breilting because i dont people to know too much about what watch i am wearing because living in asia sometime is abit dangerous if they know too much bout what u have at home but now i am in australia , i feel like buying different brand and change my watch each day .

[too solid]

For me Breitling offers a better variety of sizes and styles then Rolex. @ 6"2, 275lbs, 7.5" wrist, I can't where anything under 42mm without it looking to small for my taste. I prefer 44mm-49mm, and for that reason Breitling is my watch of choice.

[vulpro]

I've owned a few. Some of the Breitling models are just Ok... I find their bracelets cheaply made and they just don't compare to a Rolly or many other top brands. But I also had an 18K Chronomat with a Pilot bracelet (the five link) and I'll tell you what... that watch was put together as nice as any watch I've ever owned. Nicer feel in many respects to several Rolexes I own. Just a great watch. Good thing I snatched it from a dealer discontinuing the line. I stole it at 40 off. (20K retail) Two years later, I was told it was worth about 8K!

Resale is not good compared to Rolex!

[NEW]

Both are nice watches and i tend to agree with rolex being better at resale and breitling being a better value.
167614

167616

[Mlpugh]

You have three divisions and a Super division of watchmakers. Breitling is above Rolex. Rolex is an advertising brand! Rolex is making a move with the DSSD but they will never be in the super division of watchmakers. If you want to invest in a watch that could make it to the super division that would be a Panerai or just get a Patek that could be purchased for $30,000 then worth $200,000 or more years down the road. Thanks Mike

[axecollector65]

I own Breitlings, Rolexes, Omegas, IWC, Franck M and Pateks. I do agree that Rolexes and Breitlings are two different type of watches and draw different customers in most part. I happen to own both because I have a problem with buying watches. Having said that I do lean towards my Rolex sub and daytona over my Breitling Chronomat. I don't know why, but the Rolexes feel better on my wrist than the Breitling. As for which sports watch keeps better time, its the Breitling, but nothing beats the Omegas when it comes to accuracy.

JMHO

[Mr S1]

I have several Rolexes and Breitlings, and without a doubt I'd choose the Rolex every time. They just look and feel so much more special than anything else I have ever worn.

[Frankie13]

I like my GMTc very much but love this watch for 10years know and had her just serviced.
Both brands make great watches in my opinion.

[moby33]

As for which sports watch keeps better time, its the Breitling, but nothing beats the Omegas when it comes to accuracy.


:thinking: Breitling keeps better time, but nothing beats Omega when it comes to accuracy? What am I missing here? :thinking:

[WJGESQ]

You have three divisions and a Super division of watchmakers. Breitling is above Rolex. Rolex is an advertising brand! Rolex is making a move with the DSSD but they will never be in the super division of watchmakers. If you want to invest in a watch that could make it to the super division that would be a Panerai or just get a Patek that could be purchased for $30,000 then worth $200,000 or more years down the road. Thanks Mike

WTF? Panerai with ETA movements worth 200K?

You would be better off buying CHS and riding the wave.:cheers:

[cmr]

has a post been removed? i got an email notification there was a new post but i am not seeing one........ was it removed?

bluzy has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Breitling v Rolex? - in the Breitling Discussion Forum forum of Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum.

This thread is located at:
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=40072&goto=newpost

Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************
Rolex
***************

[GolfPunk]

I have had the Crosswind and the Montbrillant Datora from new (sold now for my Daytona), anyway, the Crosswind had to go back 3 times to Breitling in 2 years as the watch was losing time at a crazy rate (away 6 weeks at a time, very inconvenient) and the Datora, though admittedly has many complications, gained too much time and also the "Day" display stopped moving. I am led to firmly believe I should not have similar problems with a Rolex Daytona.

[carrera12]

Every family get together, uncles and cousins, etc all wearing Rolex. I wanted something different so I chose the Breitling SuperOcean Heritage Chrono LE. A lot of watch for the money. I received many compliments from them on the handsome SOHC LE.

[Astute]

Owned a Yellow dial Superocean with Black rubber strap & a Blue dial Titanium Avenger Seawolf with Titanium bracelet & Blue Rubber strap both good timekeepers, loved that non-reflective coating both sides on the crystal, in a certain light it looked like there was no crystal...cool IMO. The rubber straps smell edible :thumbsup:

Downside on both was the winder, used to dread the adjustment pulls :thumbsdow

[blackmsport]

have both... Rolex please

Breilitng styling is a bit bulky

[noche619]

I'm considering a Rolex Airking. I also saw this Breitling watch yesterday which I thought was quite interesting (I'm a woman). They had it with black dial or this brown. Any opinions between the Rolex and Breitling?
I was talking to a SA later (who does not selll Breitling). she said the mesh bracelets (in general, not specifically Breitling) are prone to problems. Any truth to this?
thanks

[beowulf566]

I just got the new superocean, really like it:dude: good looking sporty watch. with the rubber deployment clasp strap. really comfy on the wrist. That being said I plan on getting a rolex next for the dressy watch. I think that owning a few from different brands is the way im gonna go:cheers:

[conrail]

I've owned Breitling, Rolex and Omega. I echo what someone else said. Rolex on resale value, Breitling on value, and Omega is just plain cool :)

[Montexn]

I own Breitlings, Omegas, and Rolexes...not too mention a few more brands to boot. I don't really compare them to each other one on one, but weigh them individually for what they are.

In the styling department I would have to agree that most Rolexes tend to be more formal or on the dressier side, while Breitling tends to be styled for more of a daily wearer. That being said, both brands can be dressed up or down to meet the need of the occasion.

In the resale area of things, Rolexes do tend to hold their value a bit better than Breitling, probably due to the iconic status symbol they tend to be viewed as by the general public, but that is just a theory on my part. I think Breitling offers a better bang for the buck over Rolex and provides the owner with a prestigious time piece that they can be just as proud of.

As for in-house movements, Rolex holds the trump in that department with all their movements, parts, and pieces made exclusively by them. On the other hand Breitling does not currently make but one in-house movement and the rest of their movements are custom overhauls of existing ETA and Valjoux movements. This trend will probably change with Swatch Groups decision to halt providing outside makers with finished movements.

In either case I love both brands as well as others available and I don't see myself ever becoming brand exclusive, because that would limit my opportunities to enjoy a great many other time pieces on the market. It sure would be a boring market if all we had to choose from was one quality brand. :cheers:

[Dream99]

OK. It must be down to personal taste but When it comes to putting leather straps to either one, the Breitlings wins everytime. I can't think of any Rolex on leather that I personally like, where as Breiltings, nearly all do look sensational whern on leather /Chroc. I own 2 Rolex and no Breitling at the moment but will be getting the LE Navitimer 01 in a week or so. On of course Leather. Collect both I say, they both make sensational watches, why limit yourself?

[accutronman]

Having a GMT-IIc, a DSSD, an Emergency, an Avenger Seawolf Chrono Blacksteel LE, and a Tudor Hydro 1200 in my collection, I'd have to say that for me Rolex and Breitling are equal. Both produce finely styled and reliable timepieces that bring different functionality to my collection at a reasonable price point which is what I look for.

[HOBSONG58]

I have both Rolex and Breitling and find them both useful and quality.

[hsrdoc]

I like both. But, Brietling is more unique IMO.

[bellvederecar]

it is in the eye of the beholder.

[Big Joe]

My Chronomat Evolution is one of the nicest watches I've ever worn. It is beautiful to look at, comfortable on the arm, and runs perfect. I can think of nothing negative about this watch. It is very easy to see in low light situations.

My Navitimer World is equally as incredible but different. It looks larger on the wrist, but really isn't that much bigger. I use the slide rule function from time to time and it just looks incredibly cool. It gets a lot of cool remarks.

My Tag Monaco Ltd Ed is another very nice watch and runs flawlessly. It garners lost of comments as well. My only complaint is it does not have a sapphire crystal, but mineral. That was just like the original and it has not been a problem, but makes me a bit nervous about possibly scratching it. I do love the watch though and the square face is fun.

My Omega Seamaster is the most comfortable watch I've ever put on. It runs great and looks great. This one also gets lots of comments. Probably the most comments from others.

My Rolex Sub 2 tone Blue face is everything it is supposed to be. I wanted this watch for 30 years before getting it and I have loved it every minute. Works flawlessly and looks great.

My Rolex GMTII is my favorite watch overall. I don't know why. Maybe because it is the only one I have with a black face. Maybe because it is a GMT. Maybe because it justs fits my personality. I wear it more than the others and if I had to pick only one watch to own, this would be it. It does not run better than my others, does not look any better, is not always as comfortable, but it just seems to fit my personality more often than the others.

I really don't care which is the best value. They are all great values to me. I don't care about the fashion statement thing or the luxury thing. I Just love Swiss automatic watches. Just having something that cool on my wrist is enough no matter which brand it may be.

[amygdala]

Anyone here having problems with the steel mesh straps?

[rr-nyc]

I have both and wouldn't say one is better than the other. Both have a long history and beautiful watches. The cost of entry on a Breitling is certainly easier on the wallet but the resale value of a Rolex is unparalleled

[UofRSpider]

A Rolex and a Breitling can't be compared. They are totally different watches. Both wonderful in their own ways. Is Rolex more prestigious? Sure.

I own Tag's, Omega's, a Breitling, 2 Rolex's, and a Maurice Lacroix Masterpiece, and love them all for what they are.

I will give Breitling their credit though...my SuperOcean Steelfish is stunning. The craftsmanship is amazing.

Breitling's history is STRONG and still a private company (unlike Panerai and Omega).

[rr-nyc]

A Rolex and a Breitling can't be compared. They are totally different watches. Both wonderful in their own ways. Is Rolex more prestigious? Sure.

I own Tag's, Omega's, a Breitling, 2 Rolex's, and a Maurice Lacroix Masterpiece, and love them all for what they are.

I will give Breitling their credit though...my SuperOcean Steelfish is stunning. The craftsmanship is amazing.

Breitling's history is STRONG and still a private company (unlike Panerai and Omega).

Breguet, Zenith, IWC, Vacheron Constatin, A Lange & Söhne and Jaeger-LeCoultre are all owned by publicly traded parent companies. All with incredible histories, craftsmanship and still producing world-class product. What was your point about a private company again?

[Beeper]

I really love both, and they are impossible to compare. Different styles for very different purposes. Breitling originally pulled me into this crazy wallet-emptying hobby in the first place, so there's something special about that to me.

Both brands have some watches that I absolutely love, and some that really don't speak to me at all. I agree that some of the Lings are like wearing dinner plates, but they also have some more conservatively sized models that I really love. There's something cool about the Ani-Digi Aerospace, and I love the Chrono Super Ocean, as well as the Trans Ocean. The new Navi 1461, with the Moon Phase and leap year calendar looks nice too. On the other hand, it's hard to beat a GMT, and a WG DD with the awesome blue dial is my grail.

Overall, apples and pears. (Why not change things up a little?)

Since they both make wonderful watches, the only solution is obviously to buy both :smokin:

[unprdctb1e]

Without a doubt, Rolex definintely feels better on the wrist

[cmr]

I really love both, and they are impossible to compare. Different styles for very different purposes. Breitling originally pulled me into this crazy wallet-emptying hobby in the first place, so there's something special about that to me.

Both brands have some watches that I absolutely love, and some that really don't speak to me at all. I agree that some of the Lings are like wearing dinner plates, but they also have some more conservatively sized models that I really love. There's something cool about the Ani-Digi Aerospace, and I love the Chrono Super Ocean, as well as the Trans Ocean. The new Navi 1461, with the Moon Phase and leap year calendar looks nice too. On the other hand, it's hard to beat a GMT, and a WG DD with the awesome blue dial is my grail.

Overall, apples and pears. (Why not change things up a little?)


Since they both make wonderful watches, the only solution is obviously to buy both :smokin:


if you are wanting the dd with a glacier blue dial it is only available in solid platinum, it's not available in 18k wg.

[Beeper]

if you are wanting the dd with a glacier blue dial it is only available in solid platinum, it's not available in 18k wg.

Sorry, I mean the blue waves dial, which, unless the Rolex website is lying, is available for WG :cheers: :chuckle:

[cmr]

Sorry, I mean the blue waves dial, which, unless the Rolex website is lying, is available for WG :cheers: :chuckle:

yes, the waves dial is available with gold. i would really love to have a yg dd with a black dial and diamond markers but i don't want to sell anything to fund it...... i'll just have to keep saving. i hope you have better luck than i because i'm not making much headway......... :banghead: :chuckle:

[Geronomo12]

When comparing watches & companies that make them, I think you have to look at history and lineage. When I think of movements, I think Rolex for waterpoof, Zenith for Chronographs, Patek for Grand Complications. Breitling has done a fine job packaging and refining ETA movements in strong durable cases. They make a fine watch. Rolex makes a fine watch completely in-house. They are the pre-eminent manufacturer of well designed and durable everyday watches and as the saying goes, if you were stuck on an island, with only one watch to rely on.......ROLEX would be my choice.
Tag seems to be a big company that doesn't have a clear vision of what it stands for. Heuer before becoming Tag Heuer made some great Chronos, like the Pasadena, with ETA 7750 powering them. They may be back on track in recent years by bringing back the Monaco and getting back to what made them. Look how Omega re-emphasised the Speedmaster line, probably their greatest success.
To sum up, I don't see Breitling as competition for Rolex. I see Rolex on top, Breitling competing beneath them with Omega (who was able to compete with Rolex back in the 60s), and then Tag.

[wisguy]

I own both and I believe Rolex has the edge in terms of craftsmanship and resale.

However, there are real models to compare so it boils down to which one you like the most, I like both so I own both, simple as that.

[Sherwooddavid]

For the past year I planned on buying the new Rolex Submariner this spring but I dropped by our only Breitling AD last week and found myself admiring a Breitling Blackbird.
Now I find myself trying to decide between the two watches and make the right decision on which one to purchase. Reading through this thread has been very helpful and I think at this moment I am leaning towards the Blackbird (but this could change quickly). I really like the looks of the Blackbird and it would be nice to add another brand to my small collection.
Both watches are approximately the same price and most think the quality is good on both. The only thing that concerns me a bit is the resale value of the Breitling vs the Rolex. If I had to sell it down the road the Rolex would be much more valuable and probably easier to sell.
Anyway from what I've been reading on this thread I can't go wrong with either brand so I continue to research the Breitling Blackbird and the Rolex Submarriner online hoping to find info on which one is a better timepiece, but it will eventually come down to which one I prefer.
Any comments or advice is welcome.

[boogiebot]

For the past year I planned on buying the new Rolex Submariner this spring but I dropped by our only Breitling AD last week and found myself admiring a Breitling Blackbird.
Now I find myself trying to decide between the two watches and make the right decision on which one to purchase. Reading through this thread has been very helpful and I think at this moment I am leaning towards the Blackbird (but this could change quickly). I really like the looks of the Blackbird and it would be nice to add another brand to my small collection.
Both watches are approximately the same price and most think the quality is good on both. The only thing that concerns me a bit is the resale value of the Breitling vs the Rolex. If I had to sell it down the road the Rolex would be much more valuable and probably easier to sell.
Anyway from what I've been reading on this thread I can't go wrong with either brand so I continue to research the Breitling Blackbird and the Rolex Submarriner online hoping to find info on which one is a better timepiece, but it will eventually come down to which one I prefer.
Any comments or advice is welcome.

IMO if you are buying this based on resale you really have to lean towards a new sub. i think the black bird in a bracelet retails for around 6500 and the sub goes for around 7300. however you can most likely get 25% off the black bird where you would be lucky to get 10% off the Rolex.

in the end i think you should make your choice based on what you think looks best. both great watches.

[Sherwooddavid]

Agree 100%.

[horseco]

the ceramic Rolex GMTc & Subc, feel more exspensive

[roleyrolz]

I personally like the fact that Rolex doesn't make huge watchs they are not a gimmicky company (at least not in there products maybe there marketing though). Also one thing about rolex is that they are a market innovator not a follower a mean how many dive watches look like the sub aloooot. Also I don't think rolex is a formal dress up brand anything but actually most of there watches come with metal braclets to me classy is leather(a subjective statement of course). I see a Rolex in my future for those reasons while breitling. While a nice brand like omega are well let's face it playing catchup with rolex.even though they are on Rolex's tail.

[boogiebot]

I personally like the fact that Rolex doesn't make huge watchs they are not a gimmicky company (at least not in there products maybe there marketing though). Also one thing about rolex is that they are a market innovator not a follower a mean how many dive watches look like the sub aloooot. Also I don't think rolex is a formal dress up brand anything but actually most of there watches come with metal braclets to me classy is leather(a subjective statement of course). I see a Rolex in my future for those reasons while breitling. While a nice brand like omega are well let's face it playing catchup with rolex.even though they are on Rolex's tail.

i do like the fact that Rolex doesnt mess with the brand too much. But I wouldnt call big watches are "gimicky". I also agree that Breitling will have to play catch up. In terms of innovation but design is definitely subjective.

[boeckelr]

I personally like the fact that Rolex doesn't make huge watchs they are not a gimmicky company (at least not in there products maybe there marketing though). Also one thing about rolex is that they are a market innovator not a follower a mean how many dive watches look like the sub aloooot. Also I don't think rolex is a formal dress up brand anything but actually most of there watches come with metal braclets to me classy is leather(a subjective statement of course). I see a Rolex in my future for those reasons while breitling. While a nice brand like omega are well let's face it playing catchup with rolex.even though they are on Rolex's tail.

How does Rolex innovate today? I know they have a long history of innovation...but for the most part Rolex succeeds now by tweaking their iconic designs....Changing to a ceramic bezel or making a new clasp isnt really innovating....Heck, if you really think about it, Rolex is one of the most conservative companies there is. Their watches look the same now as they did 30 or 40 years ago.

As for Breitling making large watches - in my opinion Rolex has been late to offer large watches. I went to visit my parents a few weeks ago, and tried on my dads 1975 Datejust...and it looked like a womans watch on me. I only wish they would offer a larger Sub....because at 40mm it is still too small on me. I know I can get a DSSD, and hopefully eventually will....but its too bad because everyone who owns one says the Sub is the perfect watch. But it looks too small on me. I know that there is now a larger Datejust....so maybe Rolex is coming around on size....Anyway, in this case Rolex has definitely followed the industry.

Rolex has done exceptionally well at making people perceive its watches are the best. In my opinion, part of that is because they are more expensive than competitors like Omega and Breitling. The discounts that Breitling and Omegas AD's offer probably cheapens their brands in the eyes of many consumers (not people reading this thread), because the discounts make Rolexes seem even more exclusive. In reality, the people who have posted on this thread who either own both Breitling and Rolex or have owned both, have largely said they are of similar quality.

One thing I do not understand is why Breitling is derided for not using in house movements (until lately)....while IWC does the same thing...but is clearly recognized to be as or more exclusive than Rolex.

One more thing I would like to point out....detractors can say what they want about Breitling...but they cant say they arent original. My Steelfish (and the Seawolf, Superocean and Colt) stands on its own....while an SMP or Aquaracer clearly have been strongly influenced by the Sub. Although I cant wait for the day that I will own a DSSD, I am in the meantime happy to wear my Steelfish, which is a great watch....and it is unique and not a clone of a Rolex.

[boogiebot]

How does Rolex innovate today? I know they have a long history of innovation...but for the most part Rolex succeeds now by tweaking their iconic designs....Changing to a ceramic bezel or making a new clasp isnt really innovating....Heck, if you really think about it, Rolex is one of the most conservative companies there is. Their watches look the same now as they did 30 or 40 years ago.

As for Breitling making large watches - in my opinion Rolex has been late to offer large watches. I went to visit my parents a few weeks ago, and tried on my dads 1975 Datejust...and it looked like a womans watch on me. I only wish they would offer a larger Sub....because at 40mm it is still too small on me. I know I can get a DSSD, and hopefully eventually will....but its too bad because everyone who owns one says the Sub is the perfect watch. But it looks too small on me. I know that there is now a larger Datejust....so maybe Rolex is coming around on size....Anyway, in this case Rolex has definitely followed the industry.

Rolex has done exceptionally well at making people perceive its watches are the best. In my opinion, part of that is because they are more expensive than competitors like Omega and Breitling. The discounts that Breitling and Omegas AD's offer probably cheapens their brands in the eyes of many consumers (not people reading this thread), because the discounts make Rolexes seem even more exclusive. In reality, the people who have posted on this thread who either own both Breitling and Rolex or have owned both, have largely said they are of similar quality.

One thing I do not understand is why Breitling is derided for not using in house movements (until lately)....while IWC does the same thing...but is clearly recognized to be as or more exclusive than Rolex.

One more thing I would like to point out....detractors can say what they want about Breitling...but they cant say they arent original. My Steelfish (and the Seawolf, Superocean and Colt) stands on its own....while an SMP or Aquaracer clearly have been strongly influenced by the Sub. Although I cant wait for the day that I will own a DSSD, I am in the meantime happy to wear my Steelfish, which is a great watch....and it is unique and not a clone of a Rolex.

great post bud. you might want to check out the new Explorer II 42mm when it comes out. that might fit the bill.

[L30N]

I was under the impression that Sinn also puts quartz movements through COSC.

Copy/paste from Sinn:

Then again you speak of quartz , Seiko keeps the best time of all watches but they dont have a COSC , imo no need for COSC for quartz watches , they ll always be the most accurate anyway.

[marcinthemiddle]

You would just be wrong. Seriously. IMOP.

Omega's have the style, reputation, function, heritage and very broad appeal. The Seamasters and Speedmasters are highly sought after. Breitling will be a mall watch like Movado is a few years.:smokin:

Aren't Breitlings, Tags and Movado watches known to be accessible, higher mid-market watches? :thinking:

[dddrees]

Decided to join the ranks and be one of those that have both Rolex and Breitling. I chose the Navitimer World, something completely different in regards to look and feel than anything I have so far, however I do have an affinity for Chronographs and now I have a Navitimer.

I think Rolex will always be my favorite brand, as almost half of my watches are Rolex. However viva la difference.

[boogiebot]

Decided to join the ranks and be one of those that have both Rolex and Breitling. I chose the Navitimer World, something completely different in regards to look and feel than anything I have so far, however I do have an affinity for Chronographs and now I have a Navitimer.

I think Rolex will always be my favorite brand, as almost half of my watches are Rolex. However viva la difference.

the navi world is a great piece. serious bang for the IMO. what color dial did you get and is it on bracelet or strap. congrats on a great piece. The navi line screams Breitling.

[dddrees]

the navi world is a great piece. serious bang for the IMO. what color dial did you get and is it on bracelet or strap. congrats on a great piece. The navi line screams Breitling.

Thanks for asking. Black dial on the Black Calf strap. They had the same piece on a Black Croc, however I actualy liked it better on the Black Calf strap for some reason.

[levirichardson]

Nice

[h999r]

Both are great watches, depends of which model of rolex or breitling that I have to choose. we can not compare Daytona to Super Ocean for example. so in my opinion both are great watches , either one is a good choice just depends of which model.

[lorsban]

Without a doubt, Rolex definintely feels better on the wrist

I can agree when it comes to their diver models. The superocean sits sort of tall and feels like it's weight is concentrated, while the sub is relatively flat so it spreads its weight more evenly on the wrist.

[sig-x]

I like my Breitlings better than most Rolex watches. The only Rolex I care for is Meteorite face Daytona. I feel Rolex is getting way over priced now.

[horseco]

The Breitling is a great watch, but a Rolex is in a different league... like a Porsche & Ferrari for instance...

[boogiebot]

I can agree when it comes to their diver models. The superocean sits sort of tall and feels like it's weight is concentrated, while the sub is relatively flat so it spreads its weight more evenly on the wrist.

thats the thing about most breitlings is that they are thicker. i think a good comparison in terms of diver vs diver would be the steelfish to the sub. i would say the sub is still thinner.

[Rolex2]

I have two Rolex Oysters and one Breitling Colt. As far as I can tell, both are exclusive watches found at similar type jewelers--in some cases, the same jeweler.

Breitling, I believe, was originally an aviator watch and had one of the first chronos.
I've read Amelia Erhardt wore a Breitling on her flights. Rolex (the name from Rolls and Timex!) was one of the first waterproof watches. The perpetual self winding, I believe, was a pioneering watch.

I don't think Rolex established its elite reputation, however, until the 1960s.
I say that because my mother visited Italy in 1950, and wanted to buy the "best Swiss watch." She was told Zenith--over Longines and Rolex.

[boogiebot]

I have two Rolex Oysters and one Breitling Colt. As far as I can tell, both are exclusive watches found at similar type jewelers--in some cases, the same jeweler.

Breitling, I believe, was originally an aviator watch and had one of the first chronos.
I've read Amelia Erhardt wore a Breitling on her flights. Rolex (the name from Rolls and Timex!) was one of the first waterproof watches. The perpetual self winding, I believe, was a pioneering watch.

I don't think Rolex established its elite reputation, however, until the 1960s.
I say that because my mother visited Italy in 1950, and wanted to buy the "best Swiss watch." She was told Zenith--over Longines and Rolex.

very interesting. is it also true that it wasnt till the 80s that Rolex started to make everything in house?