Seamaster planet ocean VS Submariner date

[aaronk]

I've got a PO, but still want a Rolex

I wouldn't get a Sub though, probably an Explorer II.

[Perdu]

Well, I think the perfect watch would be a PO with a cal.3135 movement in it. Here are some thoughts.

If you can get the PO for 30 percent off the MSRP (which you should be able to) then, even though you loose more on resale, you spent much less to start with so that actual dollars of loss may not be that different.

The Cal.2500 is a 2892-A2 with a coaxial escapement added. The 2892-A2 and the 3135 pass COSC first time more than any other mens movements. The 3135 is a more sophisticated movement but both keep excellent time.

[Mystro]

My point about the steel Submariner being very common is: Most non watch enthusiast that know nothing about watches will buy a Rolex Submariner. Lucky for them its a good enough watch but none the less it has become the generic choice of the masses. Therefor its popularity has less to do with the watch and more to do with brand recognition. If I had to guess why this is, I bet the honest answer would be, "Hey I am spending a lot of money on a watch, I want people to at least know what it is." In the 80's the DJ was the choice of the masses. Now its the steel Submariner.
Is this a good thing or bad thing?? The same mentality sold a lot of BMW's in the 80's.
IMO... They break down on how much watch you are really getting for its msrp: when you buy a Rolex your money is really yielding you 60% watch and 40% brand name. Omega Planet Ocean, your money is buying you 90% watch and 10% brand name.

[spuds]

Originally Posted by Mystro

.....IMO... They break down on how much watch you are really getting for its msrp: when you buy a Rolex your money is really yielding you 60% watch and 40% brand name. Omega Planet Ocean, your money is buying you 90% watch and 10% brand name.

Yep.

[JBat]

Originally Posted by Mystro

My point about the steel Submariner being very common is: Most non watch enthusiast that know nothing about watches will buy a Rolex Submariner. Lucky for them its a good enough watch but none the less it has become the generic choice of the masses. Therefor its popularity has less to do with the watch and more to do with brand recognition. If I had to guess why this is, I bet the honest answer would be, "Hey I am spending a lot of money on a watch, I want people to at least know what it is." In the 80's the DJ was the choice of the masses. Now its the steel Submariner.
Is this a good thing or bad thing?? The same mentality sold a lot of BMW's in the 80's.
IMO... They break down on how much watch you are really getting for its msrp: when you buy a Rolex your money is really yielding you 60% watch and 40% brand name. Omega Planet Ocean, your money is buying you 90% watch and 10% brand name.

Right. Nobody is buying a James Bond watch.

[openwheelracing]

The minuscule # of "Jame Bond" buyers is insignificant compared to the lure of the name ROLEX. It's the only luxury brand most people know. They've never heard of Hublot, IWC, or Vacheron Constantine, heck most don't even know how to pronouce Tag Heuer or Breitling.

When people hear "Omega", they are thinking Greek Alphabet or math equations.
When people hear "Rolex", they think expensive watch. Not just watch, but expensive watch.

[JBat]

That's fantastic. I didn't know somebody had done a world-wide survey of Omega and Rolex buyers. Thank you.

[Thai]

Originally Posted by slevin kelevra

The co ax movement defo sounds like it does the job but isn't that just Omega striving to attempt to catch up to Rolex, the sub movments have been top knotch for a countless number of years.

Originally Posted by Perdu

Well, I think the perfect watch would be a PO with a cal.3135 movement in it. Here are some thoughts.

The Cal.2500 is a 2892-A2 with a coaxial escapement added. The 2892-A2 and the 3135 pass COSC first time more than any other mens movements. The 3135 is a more sophisticated movement but both keep excellent time.

Hmmm, you guys may want to read this article: http://www.chronometrie.com/rolex3135/rolex3135.html

Quote at the end of the article:
"And the winner is…

Of these three movements which one do I like the best? If accuracy is your only criteria, then it doesn’t matter which one you choose as there really is virtually no difference between them in that regard....

As for me, please keep in mind that no movement is perfect and that they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Having said that though there is absolutely no question in my mind, that I prefer the ETA 2892-2A over the other two. Okay, so it’s been around almost half a century and in many ways isn’t as sophisticated as the Rolex – no Breguet hairspring, or Parachrom hairspring material etc – but during its long lifetime in its best available chronometer version, it has proven itself to be an exceptionally accurate, reliable and tough movement. Its two main advantages over the 3135 are that it’s quite a bit thinner, only 3.6mm thick versus 6mm, and has only one major weakness – the inefficiency of its automatic winding system, as I mentioned in my earlier review of it. While good enough for most reasonably active folk, it is not efficient enough for those people, young or old, who lead a sedentary lifestyle.

The 3135 is the youngest, most sophisticated and best looking of these three and it has many admirable strengths. A longer power reserve and instantaneous date change to name a few. As for the weaknesses of the 3135? In my honest opinion there are only two glaring weaknesses. The first is that the oscillating weight pivots on a steel post that is riveted to it and held in place by two jewels. The small circumference of said post, coupled with Rolex’s simple and efficient reversing wheels and gearing ratios, greatly improves the winding efficiency of the automatic unit. This is probably the most efficient automatic winding system available today. But unfortunately its tiny diameter doesn’t give enough support to the weight to stop it from hitting against the movement plates every time the watch is subjected to even light perpendicular blows, let alone strong ones. I think that an upgrade to an oscillating weight pivoting on ball bearing races, like they’ve done in their new chronograph movement caliber 4130, is long overdue in order to eliminate this problem. It would be even better if they used lubrication free zirconium oxide ball bearings like JLC, PP and others that are doing so today, not only for their strength, but also for their efficiency over steel ones.

The other weakness is something that may or may not manifest itself as readily, depending on the circumstances and how often the watch is serviced. This potential problem is easily understood by any watchmaker who has serviced a lot of these movements. The problem is that the 2 setting wheels under the dial, and the two small and thin posts that they pivot on, can be easily damaged if the lubrication runs dry. If the grease on the canon pinion dries up due to age or moisture in the watch case, the teeth on these small thin wheels will break off. The more severe problem is if the lubrication on the posts runs dry, then the first post will be worn away in no time at all, as shown in the photo above. This is less of a problem on the second post as it is a steel pin that is not riveted into the main plate. So it can be easily replaced if it is worn or damaged. Unfortunately the first post is part of the main plate, and is made of brass just like it. Therefore if this post gets damaged like that, the only way to repair it is by replacing the entire main plate. An expensive proposition at best. It’s worth noting that this was not a problem on Rolex’s older caliber 3035 because the diameter of the post was quite a bit thicker, as was the set wheel itself. Please note that this shouldn’t be a problem for those who take care of their watches and have them serviced at regular intervals – every four to five years as recommended by most factories today. I am 100% in agreement with this recommended service interval."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can come to your own conclusion...about which movement you want in your PO.

[Zirotti]

Why do people compare the PO to the Sub? A more appropriate comparison would be...

Sub = SMP
SD = PO

[warrior]

i tend to agree with the spirit of this. you don't need to do a survey to know that the rolex brand is much more powerful.

people point to omega /james bond connection...but really, how often does a bond movie even come out? once every 3 or 4 years? compared to rolex, omega isn't even that well known in the states. omega views the u.s. as a secondary market in terms of allocating advertising resources and such. much bigger in Asia, though.



Top 25 Watch
Advertisers
U.S. market, 2007
Rank Brand Amount
($ million)
1. Rolex 47.10
2. Breitling 27.07
3. TAG Heuer 24.73
4. Citizen 19.85
5. Movado 15.87
6. Cartier 15.04
7. Seiko 11.02
8. Timex 10.21
9. ESQ 9.36
10. Omega 9.25
11. Bulova 9.03
12. Raymond Weil 8.09
13. Gucci 6.06
14. Patek Philippe 6.03
15. Ebel 5.95
16. Dolce & Gabbana 5.75
17. Chanel 5.72
18. Hublot 5.28
19. Jaeger-LeCoultre 4.77
20. IWC Schaffhausen 4.42
21. Ulysse Nardin 4.28
22. Rado 3.92
23. Montblanc 3.85
24. Carl F. Bucherer 3.76
25. Bulgari 3.68
Source: TNS Media Intelligence
http://www.watchbizz.com/archive/wt_...008_03_217.pdf



TOP 25 WATCH
ADVERTISERS
U.S. MARKET, 2006
Rank Brand Amount
($ million)
1. Rolex 45.27
2. TAG Heuer 24.92
3. Citizen 19.57
4. Breitling 17.93
5. Movado 15.94
6. Omega 13.83
7. Bulova 9.83
8. Seiko 9.33
9. Baume & Mercier 7.71
10. ESQ 7.55
11. Raymond Weil 7.40
12. Ebel 7.29
13. Cartier 7.24
14. Montblanc 6.10
15. Timex 5.53
16. Patek Philippe 4.71
17. Gucci 4.07
17. Bulgari 4.02
19. Ulysse Nardin 3.53
20. Jaeger-LeCoultre 3.41
21. Rado 3.39
22. Bédat & Co. 3.30
23. Wittnauer 3.25
24. Chanel 3.06
24. Dior 3.05
Source: TNS Media Intelligence
http://www.watchbizz.com/archive/wt_...007_04_145.pdf



TOP 20 WATCH ADVERTISERS:

U.S. MARKET, 2005
Rank Brand Amount
($ million)
1. Rolex 43.66
2. TAG Heuer 17.39
3. Citizen 14.81
4. Movado 13.99
5. Seiko 10.56
5. Breitling 10.54
5. Timex 10.49
8. Raymond Weil 10.13
9. Bulova 9.64
10. ESQ 7.79
11. Omega 6.72
12. Cartier 5.89
13. Patek Philippe 5.37
14. Ebel 5.21
15. Concord 5.02
16. Bedat & Co. 4.18
17. Rado 3.58
18. Anne Klein 3.39
19. Oris 3.26
19. Tiffany 3.25
Source: TNS Media Intelligence
http://www.watchbizz.com/archive/wt_...006_04_130.pdf


2004

Watch brand advertising in U.S.
RANK BRAND EXPENDITURE
($ millions)
1 Rolex 38.20
2 Movado 13.59
3 Citizen 12.25
4 TAG Heuer 9.87
5 Seiko 9.49
6 Bulova 8.96
7 Tiffany 8.18
8 Breitling 7.82
9 Raymond Weil 6.33
10 Omega 5.77
Source: Competitive Media Reporting
http://www.watchbizz.com/archive/wt_...005_03_116.pdf

Originally Posted by openwheelracing

The minuscule # of "Jame Bond" buyers is insignificant compared to the lure of the name ROLEX. It's the only luxury brand most people know. They've never heard of Hublot, IWC, or Vacheron Constantine, heck most don't even know how to pronouce Tag Heuer or Breitling.

When people hear "Omega", they are thinking Greek Alphabet or math equations.
When people hear "Rolex", they think expensive watch. Not just watch, but expensive watch.

[spuds]

Originally Posted by JBat

That's fantastic. I didn't know somebody had done a world-wide survey of Omega and Rolex buyers. Thank you.

now that's a good'un!!



((popcorn anyone???? ))

[spuds]

Originally Posted by Mystro

....IMO... They break down on how much watch you are really getting for its msrp: when you buy a Rolex your money is really yielding you 60% watch and 40% brand name. Omega Planet Ocean, your money is buying you 90% watch and 10% brand name.

Originally Posted by JBat

Right. Nobody is buying a James Bond watch.

Strangely enough I absolutely agree with both these comments....

[Mystro]

Your probably right.

Originally Posted by Zirotti

Why do people compare the PO to the Sub? A more appropriate comparison would be...

Sub = SMP
SD = PO

[Mystro]

I think Omegas much bigger world connection would be the official time piece of the Olympics. James Bond is a nice pop culture connection but the Olympics is real achievement for the spirit of man.

"I tend to agree with the spirit of this. you don't need to do a survey to know that the rolex brand is much more powerful.

people point to omega /james bond connection...but really, how often does a bond movie even come out? once every 3 or 4 years? compared to rolex, omega isn't even that well known in the states. omega views the u.s. as a secondary market in terms of allocating advertising resources and such. much bigger in Asia, though."

[Zirotti]

I love when the James Bond references start coming out. Ask 100 strangers what kind watch James Bond wore and you will get 98 strange looks. The James Bond links to either Rolex or Omega are just not that pervassive outside WIS circles.

[robertneville]

i have a po chrono and a sub lv. i agree with an earlier post, the lv looks small after wearing the po, which is much heavier. get what you like best!

[Ultraman]

The sub definitely wears more comfortable on my 7" wrist compared to the PO.
Both feel like a well made, solid watches. However, I like the heft of the PO more.

[Mystro]

I just wear them both.....

[esm]

Originally Posted by Mystro

I just wear them both.....

mmm..... its either the PO is running slow or the Serti is running fast....



great looking pair

[WJGESQ]

Originally Posted by Mystro

I just wear them both.....

PO trumps the sub.

[Mystro]

The answer is......The Rolex is running fast. It runs about +3 seconds a day. The PO is + or - 0 zero seconds in35 Daysand counting. Its one of the few automatics you could launch missiles with. After the pic I set the Sub -30 seconds. That means its good for a while.

[KJM11379]

I was at my AD yesterday during the snow storm here in New Jersey, I had on the Seamaster PO and a and Rolex Sub. I have to say if I was just born yesterday and did not know anything about history of watch makers or if I have never been subject to advertising, I would say that the Seamaster PO is a better overall watch. The price is just a bonus. I did not pull the trigger, but I am thinking about it for tomorrow when they reopen.

[Mystro]

Remember, The Seamaster has a very impressive past. The Planet Ocean is the love child of the all the Seamasters of the past and Omega has been making watches long long time. Even longer than some other brands.

[spuds]

I LOVE th PO's.....

ONLY reason I won't buy one is in case my (long saved for & still saving for!) Rolex's don't get any wrist-time.....

[esm]

Dan, you will solve the problem by wearing a rolex on left wrist and the PO on the right wrist.... Or vice versa. ;-)

Explain this to the wifey and I'm sure she will understand.

You can thank me later..... :-)

[spuds]

Originally Posted by esm

Dan, you will solve the problem by wearing a rolex on left wrist and the PO on the right wrist.... Or vice versa. ;-)

Explain this to the wifey and I'm sure she will understand.

You can thank me later..... :-)

Excellent!! LOL Eric mate LOL.....

[Mystro]

There is no problems here....Only solutions.

[Mike B]

I guess we can come to the conclusion that the Sub and PO are of equal quality, and it all boils down to personal preference.
Counting the prestige factor out of the equation, if both of these watches were made from a no-name un-famous watch company, I would pick the Planet Ocean.

[Jack Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Mike B

I guess we can come to the conclusion that the Sub and PO are of equal quality

I think some people wouldn't necessarily agree with that.

[warrior]

Sure some people would and some people wouldn't. I own both the Sub Date and PO (and have owned the LV) and would say they are of comparable quality. (i.e equal) Also, I prefer the PO over any Sub. Name cachet? Of course Rolex.

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

I think some people wouldn't necessarily agree with that.