The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > Ω Omega Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28 July 2011, 11:24 AM   #61
improviz
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tejas
Watch: your step
Posts: 2,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktmd View Post
Many of us are, and that is the fault of poor marketing on the part of Omega. If us WISers cannot figure this out, how the heck is an average consumer supposed to? Confused customers and sales staff = less watches sold.
Well put!
__________________
116520 white; 16613 black; 116710; 16570 polar; 16600. AP 15400; 15703. Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. Glashutte Sport Evo GMT. Omega Planet Ocean 2907.50.91; Planet Ocean Liquidmetal LE 222.30.42.20.01.001; Seamaster 2255.80.00. Breitling Crosswind, white. Panerai PAM 005. VC Overseas Chrono, black.
improviz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 July 2011, 12:55 PM   #62
Captain Kirkwood
"TRF" Member
 
Captain Kirkwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: Kris
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 205
Sorry for any confusion caused by my earlier post. After reading (not skimming) the Omega press releases, I'm pretty sure the salesman and I just did not know what we were looking at and that those were the "matt black ceramic" bezels. Strange that he said the ceramic versions would be coming later, but I'll leave that alone.

As mentioned, I'm not very impressed with the bezels. But I don't want to only focus on the negative. I think the layout of the new chrono is a huge improvement over the previous PO chrono. On the previous version, I hate the date between 4 and 5 and I never liked the Speedmaster layout with the registers at 3, 6, and 9. I much preferred the layout on the SMP chrono with the date at 3 and the registers at 6, 9, and 12. I'm also a firm believer in the Chuck Maddox philosophy that a chronograph should have not less than 3 registers. In this case, I think the layout with the date at 6 and the registers at 3 and 9 looks very clean and works very nicely. And the fact that one of the registers performs the functions that would typically be take up two registers, the 3 register requirement is satisfied for me.

The watches were also very pleasing aesthetically (except for the dull grey bezels). The new style matte dial is quite pleasing and the finishing is top notch. If I had not been hoping to see with LM and a lacquered dial, my initial reaction probably would have been much more positive.
Captain Kirkwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 July 2011, 01:12 PM   #63
Captain Kirkwood
"TRF" Member
 
Captain Kirkwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: Kris
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post
I've heard reports from people who've seen the new standard POs firsthand who don't like the look of the bezels, saying they look dull. The pictures I've seen of the ceramic SMP indicate the bezel is glossy. This makes sense, since the dial is lacquered and glossy. The dial on the standard POs are matt, so they're evidently making the bezel texture match the dial texture.
I'm still very interested in seeing the SMP in person. The lacquered dial and glossy bezel look nice in those pictures.
Captain Kirkwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 July 2011, 04:51 PM   #64
moby33
"TRF" Member
 
moby33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Huntington Beach
Watch: Rolex/Omega/Seiko
Posts: 2,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Kirkwood View Post
Sorry for any confusion caused by my earlier post. After reading (not skimming) the Omega press releases, I'm pretty sure the salesman and I just did not know what we were looking at and that those were the "matt black ceramic" bezels. Strange that he said the ceramic versions would be coming later, but I'll leave that alone.

As mentioned, I'm not very impressed with the bezels. But I don't want to only focus on the negative. I think the layout of the new chrono is a huge improvement over the previous PO chrono. On the previous version, I hate the date between 4 and 5 and I never liked the Speedmaster layout with the registers at 3, 6, and 9. I much preferred the layout on the SMP chrono with the date at 3 and the registers at 6, 9, and 12. I'm also a firm believer in the Chuck Maddox philosophy that a chronograph should have not less than 3 registers. In this case, I think the layout with the date at 6 and the registers at 3 and 9 looks very clean and works very nicely. And the fact that one of the registers performs the functions that would typically be take up two registers, the 3 register requirement is satisfied for me.

The watches were also very pleasing aesthetically (except for the dull grey bezels). The new style matte dial is quite pleasing and the finishing is top notch. If I had not been hoping to see with LM and a lacquered dial, my initial reaction probably would have been much more positive.
I laughed when I read that point in your earlier post...all I could think was, "Gotta love salesmen that just can't say, 'I don't know?'" Obviously there is no way Omega is going to make an aluminum insert for the new 9300 chrono only to put a ceramic bezel in a few months later (especially considering they NEVER published any verbiage to the public other than the new black bezel on the 9300's will be ceramic).

I did find your negative review of the matte ceramic bezel interesting. I for one was very excited to see it (and still am) and figured it would be kind of cool. I really want a 9300 and LOVE the fact that the PO now has a ceramic bezel. As a DSSD & SubC owner I can attest to the strength of the bezels as I've had multiple encounters when I slammed the heck out of those bezels that I guarantee would have scratched my old aluminum inserts of my previously owned Subs.

Aside from the fact they the black PO is ceramic, I thought it would be cool to be matte. Since the Rolex ceramic bezels obviously are so glossy, I figured a matte ceramic would be killer in that it changes up the look of the collection even more. But it sounds like the 'in person' viewing leaves a lot to be desired. I'm hoping this won't be a deal breaker for me when I eventually check one out in person.
moby33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 July 2011, 04:54 PM   #65
moby33
"TRF" Member
 
moby33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Huntington Beach
Watch: Rolex/Omega/Seiko
Posts: 2,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post





All pictures borrowed from the web.
I must say I'm a little bummed Omega doesn't update the bezel teeth of the SMP's. My first love is my SMP Chrono that has this same bezel...and while I love almost everything about the watch, the simple fact is this bezel design is NOT very good for grip when the watch is wet. The teeth of the Subs are one of the best designs I've ever used when it comes to slick grip, yet the SMP will always be tough to spin if they refuse to change. Too bad...
moby33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 01:49 AM   #66
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by moby33 View Post
I laughed when I read that point in your earlier post...all I could think was, "Gotta love salesmen that just can't say, 'I don't know?'"
Yeah, that. I can't tell you how many wrong things I've heard from salespeople, and not just of watches. The first example that jumps to mind - although certainly not the dumbest - happened last fall, before any mention of the 8500-based POs. A saleswoman at a local Omega AD insisted that the 2500 in the current PO was an in-house movement. I told her I was pretty sure it was modified ETA, but when she stuck to her guns, I didn't push the issue. She claimed she'd been in the business of selling Omegas for decades, and was well schooled in their products. It just goes to show you....

Quote:
Originally Posted by moby33 View Post
I must say I'm a little bummed Omega doesn't update the bezel teeth of the SMP's. My first love is my SMP Chrono that has this same bezel...and while I love almost everything about the watch, the simple fact is this bezel design is NOT very good for grip when the watch is wet. The teeth of the Subs are one of the best designs I've ever used when it comes to slick grip, yet the SMP will always be tough to spin if they refuse to change. Too bad...
I've got to agree with this, too. I find the SMP bezel tough to spin even when it's not wet, at least in comparison to coin-edged bezels, or something like Breitling's rider tab bezel. I wondered, though, if Omega thought modifying the scalloped edge would be too dramatic a change, and would offend longstanding fans of the SMP, especially given that they already did away with the waves on the dial. Such a change might also make it that much closer to the PO, and Omega seems intent on making the PO stand out as their A-list diver.

Regardless of their relative prestige, I'm more inclined to get a new SMP than a new PO. On balance, Omega corrected most of the things I didn't like about the previous SMP, while keeping its basic DNA intact. I have zero problem with the fact it retains the 2500. In not giving it the 8500, Omega has kept it from getting even thicker, and have kept its price in some realm of sanity. For me, it's one of the more exciting releases this year, by any watch company.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 03:35 AM   #67
moby33
"TRF" Member
 
moby33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Huntington Beach
Watch: Rolex/Omega/Seiko
Posts: 2,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post
Yeah, that. I can't tell you how many wrong things I've heard from salespeople, and not just of watches. The first example that jumps to mind - although certainly not the dumbest - happened last fall, before any mention of the 8500-based POs. A saleswoman at a local Omega AD insisted that the 2500 in the current PO was an in-house movement. I told her I was pretty sure it was modified ETA, but when she stuck to her guns, I didn't push the issue. She claimed she'd been in the business of selling Omegas for decades, and was well schooled in their products. It just goes to show you....
Ha, ha...been there...it's almost too painful to experience those types of episodes...but like you, I eventually just shut up because I realize I'm getting nowhere fast and I never want to be, 'That Guy' that seems to want to get into a pissing contest w/ sales people just to get into it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post
I've got to agree with this, too. I find the SMP bezel tough to spin even when it's not wet, at least in comparison to coin-edged bezels, or something like Breitling's rider tab bezel. I wondered, though, if Omega thought modifying the scalloped edge would be too dramatic a change, and would offend longstanding fans of the SMP, especially given that they already did away with the waves on the dial. Such a change might also make it that much closer to the PO, and Omega seems intent on making the PO stand out as their A-list diver.
I thought about that too, but I still think the watch could have handled a slight modification to the teeth (without any further changes than they already did) and it would still very much be a SMP & not PO. Heck, make the teeth different from the PO and then there would be no debate. Personally, I still think the SMP is a great looking watch (I love the skeleton hands and think they are even more brilliant on chrono's due to the readability of the subdial hands when covered), yet I fear the whole SMP line days are numbered. I don't think it will happen in the next few years, but I have a feeling the PO's will eventually be the only 'Seamaster' Omega makes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post
Regardless of their relative prestige, I'm more inclined to get a new SMP than a new PO. On balance, Omega corrected most of the things I didn't like about the previous SMP, while keeping its basic DNA intact. I have zero problem with the fact it retains the 2500. In not giving it the 8500, Omega has kept it from getting even thicker, and have kept its price in some realm of sanity. For me, it's one of the more exciting releases this year, by any watch company.
I agree here too, I would be of the same mindset except I have an almost 10 yr old SMP Chrono that will never leave my collection, so I figured the new PO Chrono would be a great addition. I owned the last iteration PO Chrono and liked it 'well enough', but for some reason it just didn't do it for me, so it didn't stay long. I'm hoping this new version will be a keeper.

But I'll freely admit the new price is still pretty hard to swallow...I'll probably wait to buy a LNIB to save some cash (assuming of course I can hold off long enough...I said the same thing about the DSSD and then found myself buying 3 months after it came out ). And I'm a little concerned about the thickness...that too may be a deal breaker. Time will tell.
moby33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 03:45 AM   #68
Captain Kirkwood
"TRF" Member
 
Captain Kirkwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: Kris
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 205
Yeah I admit I had not focused enough on the literature to really argue with the salesman. So while his response caught me by surprise, I wasn't in any kind of position to say otherwise. The whole interaction was kind of awkward and added to my overall disappointment.

Now, after reading the materials and these responses, I want to go back and have another look with different expectations. Maybe I'll like the new bezel if I see it again. I think anyone interested needs to see the bezels for themselves and make their own decision. While it did not appeal to me at first inspection, others may think it's really slick or tough looking.
Captain Kirkwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 04:05 AM   #69
Captain Kirkwood
"TRF" Member
 
Captain Kirkwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: Kris
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 205
I tried on the new PO Chrono and did not think it looked awkwardly thick (which is the reaction I had when I tried on the DSSD). Tried searching for the dimensions of the new PO chrono and found one post claiming it's 19.2 mm. If that's true, it's thicker then the DSSD, but it didn't strike me as wearing as tall as the DSSD. Optical illusion maybe based on the larger diameter and that the lugs curve down.
Captain Kirkwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 08:14 AM   #70
barstoolman
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 801
Just wanted to say to everyone that I now realize, while arguing primarily with Improviz and JacksonStone, that I was mistakenly using the information on the new, soon to be released, Planet Ocean's Ceramic bezel and thinking that what was the material construct of the new PO LM's bezel. I now see that both LMs ( the original and the new Ti model) have the same bezel and the new bezel is on the standard PO.

Anyway, hope you guys accept my apology and accept me back in the Omega family as I am buying 2 new ones in the very near future!!!!

barstoolman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 08:17 AM   #71
spuds
"TRF" Member
 
spuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Dan
Location: Essex, UK
Watch: West Ham! COYI!!
Posts: 7,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by barstoolman View Post
Just wanted to say to everyone that I now realize, while arguing primarily with Improviz and JacksonStone, that I was mistakenly using the information on the new, soon to be released, Planet Ocean's Ceramic bezel and thinking that what was the material construct of the new PO LM's bezel. I now see that both LMs ( the original and the new Ti model) have the same bezel and the new bezel is on the standard PO.

Anyway, hope you guys accept my apology and accept me back in the Omega family as I am buying 2 new ones in the very near future!!!!



Classy post.
__________________
Onwards & Upwards Rodders...... Onwards & Upwards.

Life is not about how fast you can run or how high you can climb...........
It's about how well you can bounce!!



TRF HALL OF FAME JANUARY 2010
spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 11:48 AM   #72
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Barstoolman, pull up a stool and have a beer. Good to have you back.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 July 2011, 01:19 PM   #73
improviz
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tejas
Watch: your step
Posts: 2,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post
Barstoolman, pull up a stool and have a beer. Good to have you back.
I'll raise a glass to that myself!
__________________
116520 white; 16613 black; 116710; 16570 polar; 16600. AP 15400; 15703. Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. Glashutte Sport Evo GMT. Omega Planet Ocean 2907.50.91; Planet Ocean Liquidmetal LE 222.30.42.20.01.001; Seamaster 2255.80.00. Breitling Crosswind, white. Panerai PAM 005. VC Overseas Chrono, black.
improviz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2011, 08:23 AM   #74
capote
"TRF" Member
 
capote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Daniel
Location: Sweden
Watch: 16570
Posts: 7,317
I saw the new PO the other day at an AD and it is really great looking. If I were to buy a diver it would be high on the list. I think it is disappointing that the new SMP has the same kind of hands like the last model. The older gladiator hands looked much better imo and I was hoping Omega would bring them back.
capote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2011, 08:30 AM   #75
JacksonStone
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by capote View Post
I think it is disappointing that the new SMP has the same kind of hands like the last model. The older gladiator hands looked much better imo and I was hoping Omega would bring them back.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the skeleton hands what were on the SMP when it first came out in '95? I'm basing this on the watch Pierce Brosnan wore in Goldeneye, so it's not like I've done a huge amount of research on this. I was always under the impression the sword hands came later, then Omega reverted back to the "original" skeleton hands.

Preferences are purely subjective; obviously there's no right or wrong. But I like the skeleton hands better than the sword hands, and am glad they're still here. The sword hands struck me as more generic, kind of toning down the uniqueness of the overall watch design. SMP, with skeleton hands, on a Bond bracelet - that's the "true" SMP, as far as my own preferences go. Of course, this theory might completely fall apart if I'm wrong in thinking the skeleton hands came first.
JacksonStone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 July 2011, 09:22 AM   #76
capote
"TRF" Member
 
capote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Daniel
Location: Sweden
Watch: 16570
Posts: 7,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonStone View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the skeleton hands what were on the SMP when it first came out in '95? I'm basing this on the watch Pierce Brosnan wore in Goldeneye, so it's not like I've done a huge amount of research on this. I was always under the impression the sword hands came later, then Omega reverted back to the "original" skeleton hands.

Preferences are purely subjective; obviously there's no right or wrong. But I like the skeleton hands better than the sword hands, and am glad they're still here. The sword hands struck me as more generic, kind of toning down the uniqueness of the overall watch design. SMP, with skeleton hands, on a Bond bracelet - that's the "true" SMP, as far as my own preferences go. Of course, this theory might completely fall apart if I'm wrong in thinking the skeleton hands came first.
You are probably right with the time line, I don't know the Omega history that well, but like you say, its all about personal preferences
capote is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.