ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

themaninblack · 15 May 2015, 09:03 AM

Almost no one uses watches like these for diving anymore, at least no one I know and I know a lot of divers. Think Suunto or Cressi dive computers. It's now just called a "diver" because that's traditionally the style of watch it is and yes, you can dive with it but that's not really the market is it.

polarinda · 15 May 2015, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregsubc

who cares what everyone else is wearing? I don't live my life by what other people wear.

x2

Joe.King · 16 May 2015, 03:04 AM

I owned both. In the end the Omega was a bit too blingy for being a diver and the way I live. Sub all the way..

john64 · 16 May 2015, 03:45 AM

When I was looking for my first 'good' watch last year, I looked at SubC (114060), an Omega SeaMaster Professional 300M and the Tudor Black Bay Heritage.

I eventually went with the SubC in April, and followed up with the Omega SMP in November.

Still waiting for the Tudor.

Rashid.bk · 16 May 2015, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

On pure style a dive watch with polished center links seldom wins...

I don't ever understand this comment. As if guys are running into dive shops to buy these watches. The amount of people actually buying this watch to dive is negligible. The fact that any of these watches have a function whether to dive or tell different times(GMT2) is purely a secondary concern as they are far from the "tool" watch of old.

If a person were really in dire need of a "dive watch", a "tool" watch, there are way better options, and ones that will actually serve that particular purpose. I would much rather use a Suunto with an altimeter and barometer while trying to climb a mountain than a Exp2, I can use the altimeter to navigate, just one of many features lacking in the Exp2. The Suunto has functions that may actually save my life on a mountain side with some of it's features which add redundant safety tools to my list of equipment. On the mountain, underwater I'd choose a Suunto but to live a normal life out around town or go on a nature walk with the dog, sure I'd choose the Swiss Luxury Watch.

These things are an accessory for men and the modern swiss mechanical watch is more than ever about an appreciation for detail, craftsmanship, quality, even to connect to the golden age of analog living.....but this constant complaint about PCLs on GMT2s and this watch along with so many others is laughable. How many guys are complaining that they're Patek or white gold Submariner has PCLs.

If one doesn't like one of these watches, in my opinion it isn't because of the PCLs, now if you are really going to dive with this watch and that was your sole intent, well ok then, but doubtful many are shopping specifically for a watch to dive with.

I'm a PCL fan and think Omega did a great job with the Seamaster MC, and the PCLs are one of my favourite features.

Rashid.bk · 16 May 2015, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUPERDOC

I really dislike threads like this...
Not for any opinions registered or comments made, but because of what a thread like this represents....

It reeks of insecurity from the Seamaster owners...
I fully believe that the SM300 is a superior watch...
But I don't have to compare it to a Submariner to appreciate it...

Rolex owners don't feel the need to justify their decision... Neither should we...

Why is it that no one on the Rolex forum posts a thread about why his Submariner is better than the Seamaster...

On a personal aside...an article written by a medical student holds no value...
Show me an intern that only triples my workload, and I will kiss his feet! ;)

themaninblack · 16 May 2015, 10:10 AM

Agree Rashid as you may have gathered from my posts. Agree about Veilance too except it's hard to come across, great travel clothes but, my Arcteryx Sidewinder jacket came apart at the hem and it 'Fabrique au Canada'!

busytimmy · 16 May 2015, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

I don't ever understand this comment. As if guys are running into dive shops to buy these watches. The amount of people actually buying this watch to dive is negligible. The fact that any of these watches have a function whether to dive or tell different times(GMT2) is purely a secondary concern as they are far from the "tool" watch of old.

If a person were really in dire need of a "dive watch", a "tool" watch, there are way better options, and ones that will actually serve that particular purpose. I would much rather use a Suunto with an altimeter and barometer while trying to climb a mountain than a Exp2, I can use the altimeter to navigate, just one of many features lacking in the Exp2. The Suunto has functions that may actually save my life on a mountain side with some of it's features which add redundant safety tools to my list of equipment. On the mountain, underwater I'd choose a Suunto but to live a normal life out around town or go on a nature walk with the dog, sure I'd choose the Swiss Luxury Watch.

These things are an accessory for men and the modern swiss mechanical watch is more than ever about an appreciation for detail, craftsmanship, quality, even to connect to the golden age of analog living.....but this constant complaint about PCLs on GMT2s and this watch along with so many others is laughable. How many guys are complaining that they're Patek or white gold Submariner has PCLs.

If one doesn't like one of these watches, in my opinion it isn't because of the PCLs, now if you are really going to dive with this watch and that was your sole intent, well ok then, but doubtful many are shopping specifically for a watch to dive with.

I'm a PCL fan and think Omega did a great job with the Seamaster MC, and the PCLs are one of my favourite features.

Well said 👍🏻

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

davidflo · 7 June 2015, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

If a person were really in dire need of a "dive watch", a "tool" watch, there are way better options, and ones that will actually serve that particular purpose. I would much rather use a Suunto with an altimeter and barometer while trying to climb a mountain than a Exp2, I can use the altimeter to navigate, just one of many features lacking in the Exp2. The Suunto has functions that may actually save my life on a mountain side with some of it's features which add redundant safety tools to my list of equipment. On the mountain, underwater I'd choose a Suunto but to live a normal life out around town or go on a nature walk with the dog, sure I'd choose the Swiss Luxury Watch.

Completely agree, is unfortunate to encounter so many comments on watch forums that buy the marketing speech.

DCgator · 7 June 2015, 01:13 PM

I like both SMP (GMT) and Sub (LV). My SMP on leather very well blends with office wear as well as the SubLV. Both are equal to me quality-wise, but yes the SMP costs a lot less. And there's nothing wrong with that at all. No matter, love having both.

landroverking · 7 June 2015, 11:52 PM

Great read.

GB-man · 8 June 2015, 11:06 AM

Yuck. Sorry but the PCL and fake patina kill it for me. I could do without a lot of things on the sub (polish on case and bracelet sides, no A/R, cyclops)....but it does most things so well and the design is so timeless.

997.2 · 8 June 2015, 11:40 PM

I appreciate the choice but I'm not a fan of the Arabic. Thus why the explorer I and SMP300 are off the table for me.

NoVaSubowner · 10 June 2015, 02:35 AM

If you have handled this watch for any length of time and tell me that it is not as nice or even nicer then a 114060M you are a true Rolex fanboy...

Now, if we are talking design vs build quality the discussion takes on a different angle. I would have gladly kept my SM300 if it was not for the faux aged dial markers. The small pip at 12 really drove me crazy as well

I prefer the design of the sub over the Omega, do i think it is a better watch? No way. But then again I purchase as much for overall design as a sum of parts then I do for anything else. When I feel

Just because I prefer the design of a Sub case and dial to the overall packaging of a SM-300 case and dial does not make the Rolex a better watch

JeremyS · 10 July 2015, 06:15 AM

I took the author's choice in comparison to be a result of the fact both the 114060 and the Master 300 are similarly sized, time-only diving watches with chronometer certifications. I certainly was comparing the two at various jewelers in Rome three weeks ago. Although I ultimately selected the Rolex, I still feel like I might snag the Omega at some point, too. My only reservation when I tried on the Omega was its thickness. Also, it's relatively squarish. I would prefer a bit more "slope" on the bezel down to the watch body. I was concerned this bezel would effectively make it almost impossible to slide under my shirt sleeve, or chew up my sleeve. Still, gorgeous watch and on my "some day" list.

superdog · 10 July 2015, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUPERDOC

As much as I prefer Omega, and will probably liquidate the Rolexes in my collection, I really dislike threads like this...
Not for any opinions registered or comments made, but because of what a thread like this represents....

It reeks of insecurity from the Seamaster owners...
I fully believe that the SM300 is a superior watch...
But I don't have to compare it to a Submariner to appreciate it...

Rolex owners don't feel the need to justify their decision... Neither should we...

Why is it that no one on the Rolex forum posts a thread about why his Submariner is better than the Seamaster...

On a personal aside...an article written by a medical student holds no value...
Show me an intern that only triples my workload, and I will kiss his feet! ;)

I agree 100% with almost all of this.

While I would not take my time to look for the threads, for certain people have made that exact comments such as that.

charger · 10 July 2015, 07:57 AM

Submariner all day long, if you want a Seamaster wait for a pre owned.

daytonaTBR · 10 July 2015, 08:46 AM

Very interesting read. . . although I have to say I respectfully disagree and prefer the submariner :)

WJGESQ · 24 July 2015, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GB-man

Yuck. Sorry but the PCL and fake patina kill it for me. I could do without a lot of things on the sub (polish on case and bracelet sides, no A/R, cyclops)....but it does most things so well and the design is so timeless.

Yep. It's a damn sad follow up to the PO.

Runfar · 24 July 2015, 12:18 PM

The reissue of the omega is very nice but I am not sure I would agree it is superior, and I mirror the thoughts that it won't be a diver watch, it will look great and it's a choice simple as that doesn't have to be better or worse

joe100 · 24 July 2015, 12:27 PM

The omega is a nice watch but it's no Submariner.

Name every Rolex with the name Submariner on the dial. Every reference. Include the TT and the Gold models and you'll have a couple dozen.

Now, do the same for the Seamaster. If it has Seamaster on the dial, name every reference. I'll bet you couldn't even get 10% of them.

That's my point. There is one Submariner. Omega makes fine watches and I love them dearly but this sort of Omega vs Rolex is nonsense.

JeremyS · 24 July 2015, 01:08 PM

I think the Omega is the more handsome watch. Yes, the Rolex will hold its value better, not that it will help you if the Omega is the watch you want. The Aqua Terra with the blue dial is gorgeous. Also, something about the Datejust II looks...wrong. The crown is too small, and the shoulders look a bit too square. I also think the bezel looks a bit thick.

If wholeheartedly agree with others that if you want a DateJust, the DJI is a great pick.

Jeremy

jshepard · 27 July 2015, 05:47 AM

The fake patina is the deal breaker for me. It's like a 20 year old who dyes his hair grey to look wiser... That patina needs to be earned...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

brabusbrad · 21 August 2016, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jshepard

The fake patina is the deal breaker for me. It's like a 20 year old who dyes his hair grey to look wiser... That patina needs to be earned...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My thoughts exactly. This would have been fine if this was a limited edition watch but on a mass produced watch this just looks tacky. This is a watch that I can't pass down to future generations because I would have to explain to them that I bought the watch brand new looking like that.

sensui · 21 August 2016, 02:53 PM

To each their own but I think this is a homerun and Omega did everything right in re-releasing this classic in a modern rendition . The luminova patina doesn't bother me just like it don't on Tudors.

brabusbrad · 22 August 2016, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sensui

To each their own but I think this is a homerun and Omega did everything right in re-releasing this classic in a modern rendition . The luminova patina doesn't bother me just like it don't on Tudors.

I agree with you that this is a homerun. The watch is more beautiful than the SubC, but if only they made one without the patina, then I would buy one. The original 300m was a beauty, it always looked more elegant than the sub.

Dcormsby · 24 August 2016, 03:23 AM

I understand his reasoning about choosing between the two. Some people (like me) have a $4000-$7000 play fund and swap watches for fun. Currently, with a new house and 8 month old, I don't have the luxury of choosing multiple $4K watches at any one time. I can understand the review if you NEEDED to decide between the two.

Things I like about the Submariner:
Case Design
Glide-lock clasp
Mercedes Hands

Things I like about the Seamaster:
Matte Dial
Bezel design
Display Back
Master Chronometer stringent testing
60 hour power reserve
Movement finishing

Things I dislike about the Submariner:
Frequency of seeing out and about in public
Engraved inner bezel is too much name branding...we get it, it's a Rolex!

Thinks I dislike about the Seamaster:
Polished center links
Instant depreciation when paying retail

RolexZen · 24 August 2016, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dcormsby

Things I like about the Seamaster:

Matte Dial

Bezel design

Display Back

Master Chronometer stringent testing

60 hour power reserve

Movement finishing

Thinks I dislike about the Seamaster:

Polished center links

Instant depreciation when paying retail

Brushed center links

And holding it's value (though I have no intention of selling)

cda555 · 24 August 2016, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brabusbrad

I agree with you that this is a homerun. The watch is more beautiful than the SubC, but if only they made one without the patina, then I would buy one. The original 300m was a beauty, it always looked more elegant than the sub.

Same thoughts as you. I would have bought a 300 Master over my PO if they had made one without the patina. I think aside from that, it is perfect.

crazycarlitos · 24 August 2016, 09:25 AM

As much as I like my SM300MC, if I can only keep one, I would have to keep my 16610LV.

Btw, the fake patina nor the PCL does not bother me at all.

16 May 2015, 03:45 AM	#34
john64 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Real Name: John Location: UK Watch: Submariner 114060 Posts: 191	When I was looking for my first 'good' watch last year, I looked at SubC (114060), an Omega SeaMaster Professional 300M and the Tudor Black Bay Heritage. I eventually went with the SubC in April, and followed up with the Omega SMP in November. Still waiting for the Tudor. __________________ Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch 3861 (Hesalite), Christopher Ward C60 #tide, 1964 Omega Seamaster Deville Automatic,Mathey-Tissot GMT Pepsi,Bremont Airco Mach 2, Rolex DateJust 41 Model : 126300 White Dial Roman Jubilee, Omega SeaMaster DIVER 300M Commander's Watch 212.32.41.20.04.001,Tudor Black Bay Blue 79220B, Omega SeaMaster Diver 300M 212.30.41.20.01.003, Rolex SubC 114060, Citizen Men's Eco-Drive Diver BN0100-51E

24 July 2015, 12:27 PM	#51
joe100 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,753	The omega is a nice watch but it's no Submariner. Name every Rolex with the name Submariner on the dial. Every reference. Include the TT and the Gold models and you'll have a couple dozen. Now, do the same for the Seamaster. If it has Seamaster on the dial, name every reference. I'll bet you couldn't even get 10% of them. That's my point. There is one Submariner. Omega makes fine watches and I love them dearly but this sort of Omega vs Rolex is nonsense. __________________ It's Espresso, not Expresso. Coffee is not a train in Italy. -TRF Member 6982-

24 August 2016, 03:23 AM	#57
Dcormsby Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Damon Location: Los Angeles Watch: Seadweller 50th Posts: 554	But some people have to choose.... I understand his reasoning about choosing between the two. Some people (like me) have a $4000-$7000 play fund and swap watches for fun. Currently, with a new house and 8 month old, I don't have the luxury of choosing multiple $4K watches at any one time. I can understand the review if you NEEDED to decide between the two. Things I like about the Submariner: Case Design Glide-lock clasp Mercedes Hands Things I like about the Seamaster: Matte Dial Bezel design Display Back Master Chronometer stringent testing 60 hour power reserve Movement finishing Things I dislike about the Submariner: Frequency of seeing out and about in public Engraved inner bezel is too much name branding...we get it, it's a Rolex! Thinks I dislike about the Seamaster: Polished center links Instant depreciation when paying retail

24 August 2016, 09:25 AM	#60
crazycarlitos "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: SoCal Posts: 1,906	As much as I like my SM300MC, if I can only keep one, I would have to keep my 16610LV. Btw, the fake patina nor the PCL does not bother me at all. __________________

15 May 2015, 09:03 AM	#31
themaninblack "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Australia Posts: 1,058	Almost no one uses watches like these for diving anymore, at least no one I know and I know a lot of divers. Think Suunto or Cressi dive computers. It's now just called a "diver" because that's traditionally the style of watch it is and yes, you can dive with it but that's not really the market is it.

16 May 2015, 03:04 AM	#33
Joe.King "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Real Name: Joe Location: Florida Watch: AP Posts: 199	I owned both. In the end the Omega was a bit too blingy for being a diver and the way I live. Sub all the way..

16 May 2015, 10:10 AM	#37
themaninblack "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Australia Posts: 1,058	Agree Rashid as you may have gathered from my posts. Agree about Veilance too except it's hard to come across, great travel clothes but, my Arcteryx Sidewinder jacket came apart at the hem and it 'Fabrique au Canada'!

7 June 2015, 01:13 PM	#40
DCgator "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: PNW Watch: DS,BLNR,SubLV,DJ2 Posts: 8,123	I like both SMP (GMT) and Sub (LV). My SMP on leather very well blends with office wear as well as the SubLV. Both are equal to me quality-wise, but yes the SMP costs a lot less. And there's nothing wrong with that at all. No matter, love having both.

7 June 2015, 11:52 PM	#41
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	Great read.

8 June 2015, 11:06 AM	#42
GB-man 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: USA Watch: addiction issues Posts: 36,859	Yuck. Sorry but the PCL and fake patina kill it for me. I could do without a lot of things on the sub (polish on case and bracelet sides, no A/R, cyclops)....but it does most things so well and the design is so timeless.

8 June 2015, 11:40 PM	#43
997.2 Banned Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Chaz Location: Cherry Hill, NJ Posts: 2,721	I appreciate the choice but I'm not a fan of the Arabic. Thus why the explorer I and SMP300 are off the table for me.

10 June 2015, 02:35 AM	#44
NoVaSubowner "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Alexandria, VA Watch: Love them. Posts: 1,087	If you have handled this watch for any length of time and tell me that it is not as nice or even nicer then a 114060M you are a true Rolex fanboy... Now, if we are talking design vs build quality the discussion takes on a different angle. I would have gladly kept my SM300 if it was not for the faux aged dial markers. The small pip at 12 really drove me crazy as well I prefer the design of the sub over the Omega, do i think it is a better watch? No way. But then again I purchase as much for overall design as a sum of parts then I do for anything else. When I feel Just because I prefer the design of a Sub case and dial to the overall packaging of a SM-300 case and dial does not make the Rolex a better watch

10 July 2015, 06:15 AM	#45
JeremyS "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 273	I took the author's choice in comparison to be a result of the fact both the 114060 and the Master 300 are similarly sized, time-only diving watches with chronometer certifications. I certainly was comparing the two at various jewelers in Rome three weeks ago. Although I ultimately selected the Rolex, I still feel like I might snag the Omega at some point, too. My only reservation when I tried on the Omega was its thickness. Also, it's relatively squarish. I would prefer a bit more "slope" on the bezel down to the watch body. I was concerned this bezel would effectively make it almost impossible to slide under my shirt sleeve, or chew up my sleeve. Still, gorgeous watch and on my "some day" list.

10 July 2015, 07:57 AM	#47
charger Banned Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: US Watch: Yachtmaster 2 Posts: 295	Submariner all day long, if you want a Seamaster wait for a pre owned.

10 July 2015, 08:46 AM	#48
daytonaTBR "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: N/A Posts: 1,466	Very interesting read. . . although I have to say I respectfully disagree and prefer the submariner :)

24 July 2015, 12:18 PM	#50
Runfar "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Colorado Posts: 336	The reissue of the omega is very nice but I am not sure I would agree it is superior, and I mirror the thoughts that it won't be a diver watch, it will look great and it's a choice simple as that doesn't have to be better or worse

24 July 2015, 01:08 PM	#52
JeremyS "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 273	I think the Omega is the more handsome watch. Yes, the Rolex will hold its value better, not that it will help you if the Omega is the watch you want. The Aqua Terra with the blue dial is gorgeous. Also, something about the Datejust II looks...wrong. The crown is too small, and the shoulders look a bit too square. I also think the bezel looks a bit thick. If wholeheartedly agree with others that if you want a DateJust, the DJI is a great pick. Jeremy

27 July 2015, 05:47 AM	#53
jshepard "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: USA Watch: GMTII Posts: 1,180	The fake patina is the deal breaker for me. It's like a 20 year old who dyes his hair grey to look wiser... That patina needs to be earned... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

21 August 2016, 02:53 PM	#55
sensui 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 12,356	To each their own but I think this is a homerun and Omega did everything right in re-releasing this classic in a modern rendition . The luminova patina doesn't bother me just like it don't on Tudors.

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