How comparable is an Omega Seamaster 300m to a Rolex Submariner?

[brigadeer]

I have been lurking around these forums for a few years now with my heart set on a used Rolex Submariner. I'm budgeting around $4,500, so I imagine that would get me a watch around 10 years old or so.

I recently came across the Omega Seamaster 300M, and I really like the looks of it (very similar to a Submariner IMHO). I'm curious how others feel in regards to the comparisons between the two.

I still like the Submariner, but I also really like the comparable looks of the Omega Seamaster 300m, and the price would allow me to buy brand new.

Curious what everyone's thoughts are here, which will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

[sncarney18]

As a Rolex and Omega fan I will give you my thoughts. The Rolex Submariner is the legendary dive watch. It is the most copied watch in the world so most divers will have some similarities. The Seamaster 300M is a great watch; however, it still has a modified generic movement vs. an in house movement like the Sub. The Speedmaster line is what drove me to Omega in the first place, not the Seamaster. I have a feeling many will agree with me that Omega is seen as a chrono watch maker first and foremost.

You have stated that you wanted a Submariner for the past 10 years. IMHO I do not think the Seamaster 300m will cure a Rolex itch if that is what you long for. The Seamaster 300m will suffice if your goal is a good Swiss Made diver that doesn't break the bank. You will only end up selling the 300m at a loss if you buy new to eventually fund a Submariner down the road. Again just my opinion.

[Mike_Templar]

Originally Posted by sncarney18

As a Rolex and Omega fan I will give you my thoughts. The Rolex Submariner is the legendary dive watch. It is the most copied watch in the world so most divers will have some similarities. The Seamaster 300M is a great watch; however, it still has a modified generic movement vs. an in house movement like the Sub. The Speedmaster line is what drove me to Omega in the first place, not the Seamaster. I have a feeling many will agree with me that Omega is seen as a chrono watch maker first and foremost.

You have stated that you wanted a Submariner for the past 10 years. IMHO I do not think the Seamaster 300m will cure a Rolex itch if that is what you long for. The Seamaster 300m will suffice if your goal is a good Swiss Made diver that doesn't break the bank. You will only end up selling the 300m at a loss if you buy new to eventually fund a Submariner down the road. Again just my opinion.

This.

[ocabj]

The Omega 300M is in my opinion a great bang for the buck dive watch. I have the 2220.80.00 which is the last blue wave dial. The quality is solid and it's a nice fitting watch. But if you really want the Sub, then get the Sub.

I'm going to get a No-Date Sub in the future (most likely a 5513), but I'm not going to sell my 300M. It's a fine watch.

[dysondiver]

theres an interesting comparison on the web , if you do a search , ive owned both , but because of the size , i wound up wearing a mid size seamaster for a couple of years as a working watch ,,,,
in hindsight i would have bought the explorer over the seamaster , just on the size issue ,, but , to be honest as nice as omegas are , and im wearing one at the moment as my daily wear ... they just arent rolexes.

[salty_snack]

A vintage SM300 is one of my favorite watches omega has produced. The new ones are ok although the escape valve is completely useless to most everyone and omega seems to continuously have problems with the end links not fitting snugly in between the lugs.

If you would buy one don't buy it new because if you ever sell it you'll take it hard on depreciation.

None the less if this is your only nice watch then it absolutely should be a sub. Don't settle.

[CDNWatchNut]

I've owned many Omegas, and still have several including an SMP 300, but IMO, while the SMP is a fine watch, if it's the sub that you've had your heart set on, then don't get distracted and compromise with the Seamaster. Chances are, you'll end up still wanting a sub anyway, and if you flip an SMP that you bought new, you'll take a big hit.
You can't go wrong with a used sub, when bought right.

[pdoukas]

Go vintage. Here's my 1967 SM300. There is also a non-date version that is identical to this without the date of course. Lastly, if you want something "functional" with the vintage look then you could go for an SM300 Watchco version. If you do go that route get the non-date version as the lume on the hands and lume on the dial are different and appear so VS. that of the lume on the non-date dial and hands. Just my 2 cents.




Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse spelling, punctuation, and brevity.

[vintagewaferthin]

Originally Posted by pdoukas

Go vintage. Here's my 1967 SM300. There is also a non-date version that is identical to this without the date of course. Lastly, if you want something "functional" with the vintage look then you could go for an SM300 Watchco version. If you do go that route get the non-date version as the lume on the hands and lume on the dial are different and appear so VS. that of the lume on the non-date dial and hands. Just my 2 cents.




Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse spelling, punctuation, and brevity.

Very nice!

[Rashid.bk]

It seems you're leaning towards the Sub. Get that, it will definitely be pleasing.
The Omega Seamaster 300 2220.80 is an amazing and equally classic, beautiful and reliable watch. I am looking for one now and when I find a decent condition one I'm going to snatch it up.
The Sub is one watch the Seamaster is another and I love them both, but if the choice is a pre ceramic Sub, then I'd choose the Omega, either the wave dial or the newer ceramic. If it's an LV or a ceramic Submariner then I'd choose the Subs.
Good luck.

[AK797]

I would get the sub, I would also save up a bit more and get a ceramic sub, the upgrades in quality are def worth it.

[And]

Omega's classic SM300 or the Seamaster professional 2254.50 with black wave dial and sword hands both give nothing away to the Sub. However I would choose a Sub over the newer SMP's with skeleton hands.

[brigadeer]

My issue is cost. I have the money to buy a Sub, but I have never spent over $150 thus far. Seems almost too big a leap to go to a $9,000 watch (although I would buy used for considerably less).

I could get a new Omega Seamaster 300 M for less than $4K. As I noted earlier, it has the sporty look of the Sub that I love, but a much more comfortable point of entry (pricing).

I guess my thought is that I dip my toes into my first expensive quality watch slowly, then if it's everything I think it will be, upgrade to the Sub at a later point.

All that said, I would still be settling as the Sub is truly my hearts desire.....

Appreciate everyone's continued thoughts and advice!

[SUPERDOC]

Originally Posted by brigadeer

My issue is cost. I have the money to buy a Sub, but I have never spent over $150 thus far. Seems almost too big a leap to go to a $9,000 watch (although I would buy used for considerably less).

I could get a new Omega Seamaster 300 M for less than $4K. As I noted earlier, it has the sporty look of the Sub that I love, but a much more comfortable point of entry (pricing).

I guess my thought is that I dip my toes into my first expensive quality watch slowly, then if it's everything I think it will be, upgrade to the Sub at a later point.

All that said, I would still be settling as the Sub is truly my hearts desire.....

Appreciate everyone's continued thoughts and advice!

I love Omega Dearly...But Even I would advise that you get the Submariner...
You will regret it...and the Difference in price will ot make any difference 1 week after you've purchased it.

Furthermore, spending money on the SMP would put you further away from your goal...When it comes to something like this, you really can't inflect too much rational thought, because it is an emotional object...

You have to follow your heart...

Think about that price difference...then amortize that over the next 10-20-40 yrs of ownership....not as big of a deal..

If financially you can not afford the Submariner, the SMP will not fill that void...just save up.

If you truly loved the SMP... and were torn between the two, I would have no hesitation recommending the Seamaster - its a fab watch...but if you're asking if it would be an ok substitute for your sub..the answer is no...

[steveclocks]

Originally Posted by SUPERDOC

I love Omega Dearly...But Even I would advise that you get the Submariner...
You will regret it...and the Difference in price will ot make any difference 1 week after you've purchased it.

Furthermore, spending money on the SMP would put you further away from your goal...When it comes to something like this, you really can't inflect too much rational thought, because it is an emotional object...

You have to follow your heart...

Think about that price difference...then amortize that over the next 10-20-40 yrs of ownership....not as big of a deal..

If financially you can not afford the Submariner, the SMP will not fill that void...just save up.

If you truly loved the SMP... and were torn between the two, I would have no hesitation recommending the Seamaster - its a fab watch...but if you're asking if it would be an ok substitute for your sub..the answer is no...

R.J. my friend, I could put it any better way! I totally agree with your vision

[steveclocks]

Originally Posted by steveclocks

R.J. my friend, I could put it any better way! I totally agree with your vision

Seems like I am sleeping I want to say: I COULDN'T put it any better !!!! (I always have to correct myself these days-getting older I guess

[SUPERDOC]

Originally Posted by steveclocks

Seems like I am sleeping I want to say: I COULDN'T put it any better !!!! (I always have to correct myself these days-getting older I guess

maybe you're getting close...I can get a good price on a Breguet...

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by brigadeer

My issue is cost. I have the money to buy a Sub, but I have never spent over $150 thus far. Seems almost too big a leap to go to a $9,000 watch (although I would buy used for considerably less).

I could get a new Omega Seamaster 300 M for less than $4K. As I noted earlier, it has the sporty look of the Sub that I love, but a much more comfortable point of entry (pricing).

I guess my thought is that I dip my toes into my first expensive quality watch slowly, then if it's everything I think it will be, upgrade to the Sub at a later point.

All that said, I would still be settling as the Sub is truly my hearts desire.....

Appreciate everyone's continued thoughts and advice!

I have an older SMP (2254.50) and a new Sub C (114060). The SMP is a stellar watch. It is very comfortable, solidly built, has great lume, AR coating, etc... It has a lot of good things going for it. The Sub is... well... a Sub. It's an amazing watch. Is it worth the price? I think so!

Both are very nice and you cannot go wrong with either. If your heart is set on the Sub, buy it and don't look back. Sure, it's 5k more, but that means nothing when you think of it as a lifetime of joy.

Good luck.

[salty_snack]

After 10 great years with your sub you won't even care what you paid for it... and after 20+ years you won't even remember.

It's your life so spend it wearing what you want. If that's a sub then don't waste your time and money with a seamaster.

[pdoukas]

When it comes to luxury items there are 2 trains of thought. First, always go with your heart. Otherwise, you'll always wish you had what-you really wanted but settled for less. Second is buy the version of what you want at a price point that you are ok with. In this case it sounds like you really want a sub, but are concerned with price. So why not consider a more vintage approach to the sub? Entry points are more acceptable and you'll have a sub. Plus, if you decide you want to flip it, then historically, you'll either break even or make a little something if you keep it a while.

[zama]

I own both, but the Sub will always be what I keep. The Omega is a fine watch, but the cache is the 911 of watches the Sub. When I first wanted a Sub I went the other side of the family a Tudor Sub (not a Omega), but at the end of the day it was not a Rolex Sub. I think this is actually an easy call, the Rolex Sub will hold its value better than any other watch around. So in simple terms you will always get your money back if not gain, an Omega will go down in price if bought new. Maybe the compromise is a nice second hand Omega which will cost you 1/2 the amount (given you have never spent that much, you might even be able to add an old Datejust to go with the Omega for SUB money. Remember the key with watches you can always have them serviced and lightly polished effectively making them look like new, so buying a second hand Sub is not like buying a 10 year old car.

By the SUB and you will never look back.

[KellyM3]

As someone who learned by experience don't compromise get what you truly want

[Tintmasterjon]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

As someone who learned by experience don't compromise get what you truly want

X2. My omega purchase did not appease my rolex craving. Ended up getting the rolex anyway,still ,no regrets. I have both now!

[TitanCi]

I love Omegas. Very fond of them. I've owned 5 thus far, but kept 3. My current rotation is 9300 POC and 9300 Speedy.

As much as I love Omega, I really don't like the SMP, and I would go Sub over that. It never appealed to me and I despise the bracelet. It mimics the Sub, but if the sub is truly what you want... save up for it.

The SMP is a great bang for your buck piece though.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by TitanCi

As much as I love Omega, I really don't like the SMP, and I would go Sub over that. It mimics the Sub, but if the sub is truly what you want... save up for it.

The SMP is a great bang for your buck piece though.

Yeah its a bit like the Sub's younger brother, so get the old boy!

[Jeelan]

Originally Posted by TitanCi

It mimics the Sub…

stretching it a bit here….

by that argument almost anything with round hour markers can be said to mimic a Sub…

There's no similarity between the SMP and a Sub - domed crystal vs flat crystal, no cyclops vs cyclops, matt dial with pattern vs gloss dial with no pattern, skeleton hands vs solid hands….

am i missing something??

Bias towards one brand or another aside - i wouldn't say one mimics the other.

cheers
Jeelan

[Chad072]

Originally Posted by Tintmasterjon

X2. My omega purchase did not appease my rolex craving. Ended up getting the rolex anyway,still ,no regrets. I have both now!

Ditto

[Steelgold]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

As someone who learned by experience don't compromise get what you truly want

X2

[T. Ferguson]

I'm reading between the lines here. You've lusted after the Sub forever but now that you're close you're second guessing the cost. The Omega has entered the picture mainly to rationalize spending less money. But the Sub is what you truly want. Check the history and if needs service consider that in your budget. When the watch comes back from the RSC it'll look like a brand new watch.

If it makes you feel any better about the Sub, keep in mind that whatever you spend it's not like money down the drain. Unlike spending the funds on a vacation and being left with just a memory, the Sub will continue to have value. Not trying to put it in the category of a wise investment, but just making a point. If you spend $4,500 and buy a good example, you can enjoy it for years and get most of it back if you ever sell it. What small amount you might lose would probably be less than what you'd lose on the brand new Omega as soon as you walk out of the jewelry store with it.

Why settle now after working towards it for friggin' years?

[SubTTKky]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

As someone who learned by experience don't compromise get what you truly want