Planet Ocean LM vs. Sub C

[dsio]

Originally Posted by psv

I have a lot of respect for the PO and it is an excellent diver/everyday watch at a very attractive price, but sorry guys, it is no match for the Submariner Ceramic. It is a true classic and milestone/historical watch. They just aren't in the same league! :-)

I really like the dial, case and bracelet of the PO, but the choice of fonts for the numerals, the broad arrow hands and the HE valve valve at 10 o'clock just kills it for me.

Well...

The sub's history is undeniable, but its not alone. Omega made a very unique and special dive watch in the same era as the original subs called the Seamaster 300, which carried the same brilliant Cal. 501 that my pie-pan has in it.

Have a close look at the PO LM, then have a look at this picture of the 1957 Seamaster 300, and do a double take:



Note the dial, the broadarrow hands, the bezel, with its thin outer black portion and thin inner silver portion. Aside from the date and some tech, its the PO LM's grand-daddy. The SM300 had date as an option before the 1680 hit the market as well.

Those broadarrow hands and fonts that you are against are a matter of Omega being true to its 50+ year history.

[dsio]

The twisted lugs, hour markers, exact font, and date window on this vintage SM300 also point directly to the PO from the 1960s.

[psv]

Thanks for that history lession, Ashley. Great to know.

Don't get me wrong, I really like Omegas (my father's favorite brand when I grew up) and I'm (finally) getting a Speedy Pro next, it is just the new PO falls short of the SubC IMPO (it is great that we all have different tastes and opinions, it would be boring otherwise). The arrow hands are historically correct, I know that, they are just not for me aesthetically speaking. Love the old sword hands though! :-)

[esm]

great one Ashley!
i remember seeing a picture outlining the history of Seamaster divers and how the PO was created.... (pls link that pic if you have one handy).

[dsio]

Originally Posted by esm

great one Ashley!
i remember seeing a picture outlining the history of Seamaster divers and how the PO was created.... (pls link that pic if you have one handy).

Not sure I've seen that one, would be interesting though.

You know its almost a bit sad that the de-facto Seamaster has become the bond, and I'm saying that as someone that owns the bond chrono, because it looks nothing like the original SM divers and the PO was a return to the SM's roots rather than a design departure.

I do prefer the sword hands to the BA hands, their lume is always better and they seam more readable, and while I don't mind the HEV, I don't see why they haven't just integrated it in the case like the Seadweller has (the PloProf has the SD type HEV, so there's no real excuse other than styling).

I don't think its a co-incidence that the PloProf was re-issued not long after the PO took off, and its definitely not a co-incidence that the PO is now being re-released on steel mesh bracelets, as the SM300's most recognized look is on mesh, in fact I'd go as far to say mesh is to the Seamaster what NATO is to the Submariner.

Someone at Omega is reviving their dive history, wouldn't surprise me if we had a baby PloProf or a big blue make a comeback at Basel.

[RW16610]

All it comes down to in the end is personal preference. Different strokes for different folks. I have owned both brands and to be honest there is no difference in quality, both are amazing and will do the same things. Just boils down to which bit of history you prefer and the case shape etc. For me my preference is now Rolex but after owning the Planet Ocean I saw first hand that all the interest in it has very little to do with hype, as it lives up to that. Again, once either of these great watches makes you happy that is all that matters in the end

[Xpert37]

If the PO LM has 8500 movement, then I'd say PO LM. I do own a non-LM PO, which I love. I also love the Sub (not Sub C).

[kaiserphoenix]

The Omega has an ETA movement, rolex = in House. Nuff. Sooner or later the POs will have ceramic bezels with an 8500 movement, THEN we are talking same league!

[dsio]

Originally Posted by kaiserphoenix

The Omega has an ETA movement, rolex = in House. Nuff. Sooner or later the POs will have ceramic bezels with an 8500 movement, THEN we are talking same league!

I think this point should probably scare Rolex a fair bit, when you look down the spec sheet and weigh up the pros and cons of the two watches, the in-house calibre is possibly the most significant bragging point the Sub-C has over the PO, and if Omega somehow do manage to shoehorn the 8500 into it, the sales argument degrades from "its in-house" to "Its a Rolex".

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say something more than a different colored hairspring is going to be needed to improve the Sub's movement very shortly or its going to be left behind Blancpain, JLC, Omega and Panerai.

The competition are running multiple sequential barrels for massive power reserves, new technologies like co-axial escapements (irrespective of its benefits, its cool, and its innovative, even if it accomplishes little), better decoration and more attractive designs (the 8500 is sexy to look at it, google the Hour Vision).

Saying "workhorse", "reliable", "proven track record" etc isn't a valid excuse to not continue to develop, the ETA's are reliable, many models probably more so than their Rolex equivalent (I know I sure as hell wish the rotor axle on my submariner was designed better).

[esm]

Originally Posted by kaiserphoenix

The Omega has an ETA movement, rolex = in House. Nuff. Sooner or later the POs will have ceramic bezels with an 8500 movement, THEN we are talking same league!

to be fair - Omega owns ETA, so "technically", it is an in-house movement

[dsio]

Originally Posted by esm

to be fair - Omega owns ETA, so "technically", it is an in-house movement

This is true ;)

And also "technically", one could argue that Rolex (Montres Rolex S.A.) does not make their own movements, and that a second company (Manufacture des Montres Rolex S.A.) makes movements for Rolex.

[esm]

Originally Posted by dsio

Not sure I've seen that one, would be interesting though.

found it.... thought it was interesting to understand how Omega came up with the PO design



i was linked by a WUS member and below is quite a pix heavy thread regarding to the Omega divers - worth the read imo

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f45/ome...ns-235359.html

[dsio]

Originally Posted by esm

found it.... thought it was interesting to understand how Omega came up with the PO design



i was linked by a WUS member and below is quite a pix heavy thread regarding to the Omega divers - worth the read imo

http://forums.watchuseek.com/f45/ome...ns-235359.html

Very cool! That's even more than I'd imagined, the PO really is a lot like the Speedmaster Broadarrow in how it echos history.

[openwheelracing]

Originally Posted by kaiserphoenix

The Omega has an ETA movement, rolex = in House. Nuff. Sooner or later the POs will have ceramic bezels with an 8500 movement, THEN we are talking same league!

actually the 8500 caliber is in a better league than Rolex' offering at this point...

[psv]

If we're nit-picking is the Cal 8500 truly "in-house"? It is more like "in-Swatch-Group" if I understand things correctly.

A re-issue of the Seamaster 300, properly named, with a great movement would be a huge hit IMO.

[esm]

Originally Posted by openwheelracing

actually the 8500 caliber is in a better league than Rolex' offering at this point...

This kind of statement shows nothing really... IMO. I would be really really interested to know the actual facts why a 8500 is better than a 3135?

How long has 8500 being doing the rounds and how long has 3135 being deployed?

[dsio]

Originally Posted by psv

If we're nit-picking is the Cal 8500 truly "in-house"? It is more like "in-Swatch-Group" if I understand things correctly.

A re-issue of the Seamaster 300, properly named, with a great movement would be a huge hit IMO.

That's pretty much what BP's done with the fiddy of late, and I agree it'd go over very well.

[dsio]

Originally Posted by esm

This kind of statement shows nothing really... IMO. I would be really really interested to know the actual facts why a 8500 is better than a 3135?

How long has 8500 being doing the rounds and how long has 3135 being deployed?

FACT: It looks better with a display-back

[Ikester]

Originally Posted by Mike B

Wow, nice comparing the two together !

Now, call me crazy, since I know this is a Rolex site, but I actually prefer the look of the Omega LM PO over the Sub-C.
Both are however GREAT watches, and I wouldn't mind owning either one of them :)

I agree, definitely the Omega PO LM series is superior in build and quality to many high end watches.

The LM series is back ordered like mad so that shows how bad ass that watch is!

[esm]

Originally Posted by dsio

FACT: It looks better with a display-back

Oh please... Please do not tell me you wear your watch with a clear display back back-to-front, so you can look t the movement anytime you want.....

[psv]

Originally Posted by Ikester

I agree, definitely the Omega PO LM series is superior in build and quality to many high end watches.

The LM series is back ordered like mad so that shows how bad ass that watch is!

That will be filed under opinion. Not fact.

[esm]

Originally Posted by Ikester

The LM series is back ordered like mad so that shows how bad ass that watch is!

question - how can an item be "back ordered" when it is supposed to be a "limited edition run"

please explain

[psv]

Originally Posted by esm

question - how can an item be "back ordered" when it is supposed to be a "limited edition run"

please explain

Let me guess: "That is what the AD/salesperson told me, and he seemed like a nice and trustworthy guy!" ;-)

[esm]

Originally Posted by psv

Let me guess: "That is what the AD/salesperson told me, and he seemed like a nice and trustworthy guy!" ;-)

oh yeah... and a glass of champagne also does the trick

[Perdu]

It's very interesting to see how Omega came up with the PO design. I'd like to Omega have more design integrity and with the Ploprof and PO it looks like they are doing this. I have the black GMT and it looks like a very close descendant to the SM300 with the sword hands.

[openwheelracing]

Originally Posted by esm

This kind of statement shows nothing really... IMO. I would be really really interested to know the actual facts why a 8500 is better than a 3135?

How long has 8500 being doing the rounds and how long has 3135 being deployed?

whatever floats your boat. 8500 caliber truly is an amazing movement, both technologically and aesthetically. If you "really really" want to know, then it's not too difficult to find. IMO it's a step beyond the 3135. It's quite different from 3135 as well. Omega was at a good position to introduce a new movement, and a better movement in their eyes. Rolex simply can't afford the same. It's not in the business plan of the luxury market.

Just because a movement has been around longer, certainly does not make it better. Usually the opposite.