Rubberb vs. Everest

[ThunderRoad261]

I previously owned the Omega Seamaster Diver 300M (newer wave dial). I found the Omega rubber strap to be very comfortable and excellent quality. Can anyone compare the RubberB and/or Everest to the Omega strap in terms of quality, design/cut and comfort?

[Truck Driver]

I have owned both Rubber B and Everest, (tang buckle and classic), for my Sub 14060M.
As mentioned before, the Rubber B with it's downward angle leaving the case and shorter strap suits gents or gals with smaller wrists (<7"). The Everest works well on larger wrists with a wider angle leaving the case around and more strap length. Everest is also more supple, Rubber B is rigid though not uncomfortable. Despite what their online ads state, both straps come with new spring bars as the existing Sub OEM bars are too thick for mounting while maintaining smooth bezel rotation. Rubber B has the longer spring bar, but both are not as substantial as the OEM 93150 springbars. However, both do the job of keeping the watch on your wrist and I do not baby my tool watches. I am quite the destroyer of watches infact, having broke 2 G-shocks - the second hand fell off if one after hitting a garage door rather hard, an Omega PO suffered bezel detached, IWC Aquatimer - springbar snapped..the list goes on..
All in all, I prefer the Everest as my wrist 7.5" and I like the more robust look. It is better proportioned for my Sub, the Rubber B looks a tad too thin. Also, the Everest is more dark grey than black, which contrasts well with the deep black of the watch face and bezel. Everest strap has more holes, making adjustment to the correct fit easier too. In the end I did not like the classic fitting (using the 93150 clasp) of either manufacturer and returned both no questions asked. Imo, if you're keeping the clasp, may as well keep the bracelet as the purpose for me of a rubber strap is adjustment on the go without much weight and wearable comfort in a tropical climate.