ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
10 January 2010, 12:49 AM | #91 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: massachusetts
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 1,669
|
Nothing wrong being a contrarian
Quote:
|
|
10 January 2010, 05:04 AM | #92 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Quote:
When it comes to pricing, though, I think I'm right on. Rolex charges what it charges because people are willing to pay it. As good as the SMP's and PO's are, can you really see Omega charging $6K for one? They'd go out of business. |
|
10 January 2010, 06:13 AM | #93 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scandinavia
Watch: ♛
Posts: 1,330
|
I think the watch design by Omegas are is great, wish the 5513 would be 42mm and have that bevelled case like the speedmaster/300Mseamaster..
Or the new rolex sub coming out with excellent lume, devil-tail hands, 600m waterproof and co-axial like the PO but Omega choosed a different marketing route long ago with not going mainly inhouse movements like Rolex and thus lowering the price range. Omega probably sold more watches that way but could have been right up there with AP or Rolex if they wanted to I blame it all on the owner.. Swatch group |
10 January 2010, 08:36 PM | #94 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: World Citizen
Posts: 593
|
IT all depends on how you define "upgrade"???
Feature content-Omega Quality of Materials-Rolex Exclusivity....Maybe equal Retained Value-Rolex Brand recognition-Rolex Rolex is one of ONLY 3 Full Line Manufacturers Sean and Roger ()Rolex v Pierce and Daniel (Omega) Omega has the more modern design/styling. Rolex more traditional/classic. You are right to feel both in your hands....for me that is a more important indication of quality/desirability than anything else. But... undoubtedly both are fine watches. I'm sorry,........but the Ploprof should NEVER be considered comparable to SDDS!!!!!! Look at the design,engineering and specs of both.....they are not to compare,but only to CONTRAST!! |
11 January 2010, 04:55 AM | #95 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MississaugaCanada
Watch: Rolex DJ Z series
Posts: 31
|
I too like the TAG Grand Carerra line. I have and Omega Speedmaster Classic and a DJ, but the Grand Carerra line has been calling me...
|
11 January 2010, 05:52 AM | #96 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London, UK
Watch: Sea Dweller 16600
Posts: 163
|
Try a Rolex Sea Dweller - it ticks all your boxes - solid like a tank.
__________________
DEEPSEA SEA-DWELLER 116660 V SERIES DAYTONA SS 116520 V SERIES SEA-DWELLER 16600 V SERIES |
11 January 2010, 01:00 PM | #97 | |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,185
|
Quote:
The ProProf is a true diver's watch. Fr. John† |
|
11 January 2010, 01:20 PM | #98 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Brandon
Location: Indy: GO COLTS!!!
Watch: Omega Seamaster PO
Posts: 337
|
Agree!
__________________
Trust me, I'm in advertising. |
18 January 2010, 09:24 AM | #99 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UTC/GMT +1 Hours
Watch: 16570
Posts: 250
|
Quote:
GL! |
|
18 January 2010, 10:03 AM | #100 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,140
|
Omega was making quality timepieces before Rolex made it's first watch....
But, ..... Omega is now part of the cost conscious Swatch group... Bracelet pins are a fraction of the diameter of Rolex screws... Rolex uses full balance bridges in their movements and has had free sprung balances for years... Omega is just starting to put these things on their ground-up Co-axials just to make them live as long as advertised.. Rolex uses 31 functional jewels and an additional half dozen at other wear points....... Omega uses the standard 27.. Rolex uses their own date change mechanism making a date change or hour change simple at any time of the day or night... Omega has the basic gear and pinion engagement making them fragile from 8 pm to 2 am. The Omega clasp is nicely machined, but relies on a paperclip (OK, a couple of stainless wires) to capture a screw head - they can be forced open and don't work well if they get gummed up.. If you are an Omega fan..be one... I have a half dozen and I love every one...I am a fan..... But trying to compare watch to watch is fruitless.. Swatch has decided to try to bring back Omega into the Luxury category to compete with Rolex....... I say good for them... they're on the right track.... Let's wait a few years and see............
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member Last edited by Tools; 30 January 2010 at 03:38 AM.. |
18 January 2010, 10:07 AM | #101 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,824
|
I own both. I bought a new Serti Submariner 12 years ago and I love the watch dearly because it is still different looking from the rest of the Sub/SD crowd. In my rural area, there is not a lot of nice watches walking around but the ones I see are always a steel Sub. That being said,...The new PO is a better watch IMO and is a steal at the current pricing. My Planet Ocean is currently keeping + or - 0 zero seconds in 3 weeks and counting. The Coaxial movement is amazing. I also like the refreshing yet beautiful design over the classical and overly copied design of the Submariner/SeaDweller. The Omega is also offered in a choice of sizes which I find refreshing from the "Take it or leave it" mentality of Rolex. Yea once you get over "Its a Rolex" crap and every idiot asked you "How much it cost?" You will be left with the question. Why does the Rolex really cost more? Its not built any better. IMO It cost more cause Rolex says so and at this point of my life, I need a better answer than that. Rolex is a safe choice and a good choice if you are buying into the watch design and not into the name.
To answer your original question. Rolex is NOT better than Omega. Both are equally good depending on the look you are after. |
27 January 2010, 06:08 AM | #102 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Glasgow UK
Watch: 126610LV
Posts: 759
|
I've been a lurker both here and another well known UK Rolex forum for over a year now. This is the approximate time it has taken me to siphon away the £££'s for my first Rolex - a GMTIIc. Currently I wear an Omega (Co-Axle 41mm Automatic) which I am very keen on. I really like the heavier weight, overall feel and comfort factors apart from the plainly good looks the watch clearly has.
I had a hankering a few months ago for a Breitling but having tried one on at an AD I instantly realised I was not a fan - too blingy, too light, too..............well you know. So today I went along to local Rolex AD to try on the GMTIIc. To say I'm gutted is an understatement. Clearly in my mind I had this mental image that the watch would be better in all respects than my current Omega - and I eventually left half an hour later downhearted with my money intact! The ceramic dial and dial movement were absolutely georgeous - wonderful feel. The maxi dial was mint. The newly designed strap - very tidy.........................but the size and weight of the watch, wristfeel etc. was................well no where near the Omega - in my humble opinion. I work in sales so value for money comes very high in my list of expectation and the GMTIIc missed the mark. I guess the marketing got to me but the reality has now hit home. It has to be a PO! Just my opinion FWIW. |
27 January 2010, 08:08 AM | #103 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: Brian
Location: toronto canada
Watch: Ball Master Diver
Posts: 1
|
Cheers skip73 - reading all the posts I would comment that IMO the PO wins. Personally, fine engineering wins out over brand, as long as the build quality is also there. Recently, picked up a Ball Master II diver (yes I am an avid diver) and although this watch has lower brand recognition, the build quality, clasp, links, bracelet, 53 tritium tubes are incredible for the price - besides would I actually take a $3-5k watch underwater? Same reason I dive with a point and shoot and leave my full frame dslr on land. My next watch based on these posts will be a PO. Cheers!
|
28 January 2010, 01:23 AM | #104 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
Quote:
Nor is it all that durable: http://people.timezone.com/mdisher/a...135/3135_1.htm And yes, the new Caliber 8500 from Omega has the balance bridge along with other significant improvements not seen on a Rolex. I do agree that the Sub is an icon. Personally, i would pick it (or SD) over the Omega PO for that very reason. (I am a Rolex and Omega fan.) My problem with Omega is that they change style (and direction of design) way too often. Hopefully, with Swatch moving Omega to Tier 1, Omega design will be more consistent from generation to generation. I do love my Hour Vision. However, when talking about movements, Rolex ain't that great as people are led to believe. |
||
28 January 2010, 02:49 AM | #105 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Quote:
|
|
28 January 2010, 02:54 AM | #106 | ||
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
28 January 2010, 06:11 AM | #107 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,824
|
Yea but Omega is a older watch company...
|
28 January 2010, 06:41 AM | #108 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
50 years of history is great and all...has the 3135 been in existence that long?! Regardless of heritage, the 3135 (and other Rolex movements) still has at least one DESIGN flaw that is WIDELY recognized by watchmakers as a significant flaw. And as noted above, not everyone who is in the "know" agree that the Rolex movement is superior to even the ETA base movement! That's just facts. Read the conclusion of the first linked article. |
|
28 January 2010, 07:03 AM | #109 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
No, the 3135 has been around for about 20 years, as I referenced in the other Sub/PO thread in this forum. That's twenty distinguished, trouble-free years.
And I didn't say the 8500 isn't robust, only that it hasn't been around that long. To claim any movement has long-term durability without the history to back it up is folly. |
28 January 2010, 07:05 AM | #110 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
|
28 January 2010, 07:08 AM | #111 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Oh,and Thai, I've read that article before. Maybe those two point mentioned are flaws from a technical standpoint, but have they really manifested themselves as real-world issues? I think not. Maintain the watch as you should and you'll be fine. There's a lot of old 3135's out there running just fine.
|
28 January 2010, 08:43 AM | #112 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
|
|
28 January 2010, 08:59 AM | #113 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Quote:
Either way, you are preaching to the choir to a certain extent, because I love Omega's and Rolex's. Both companies make outstanding pieces. |
|
28 January 2010, 09:01 AM | #114 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Real Name: Paul
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 14,578
|
No more jibes, chaps.
__________________
..33 |
28 January 2010, 09:05 AM | #115 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Actually, TWO articles. From my brief searching, all the articles written by watchmakers or people in the "know" about Rolex movements have not been glowing. However, i see "testimonials" on forums about its robustness and durability. Yet, when you read the articles, you don't get the same solid feeling from the writers. So, who does one believe is the big question i guess.
|
28 January 2010, 09:07 AM | #116 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
|
28 January 2010, 09:25 AM | #117 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Posts: 884
|
Fun thread to read through. I've gone over this "Omega vs. Rolex" SO many times in my head it's ridiculous. I'm an engineer, so the "follow your heart" argument makes no sense to me. There NEEDS to be a logical explanation for why I should choose one watch over the other.
But there isn't. I'm thoroughly convinced, from a side-by-side standpoint, that Omega provides better value for your dollar. I mean, a used PO for $1800 is a STEAL on a watch of that quality. But I still desperately want a Rolex sub or SD, despite the fact that I really think the bracelet is crap (had a 14060M). I just appreciate the history behind the watch. At the same time, I love Kobold watches as well - so that goes to show you that there really is no logic in it at all. Still, it's nice to read a thread that showcases the thought process that many are going through. |
29 January 2010, 07:27 AM | #118 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Hehehe...well, the 2892 has been in existence much longer (according to article above)...and the Coaxial has been in existence for over 35 years now. So, there goes your argument!
|
29 January 2010, 07:43 AM | #119 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Quote:
Looks like I'm back in the game. |
|
29 January 2010, 07:50 AM | #120 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.