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 6 October 2012, 09:26 PM   #91
gettocard
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Andy
Location: EU
Watch: them come and go..
Posts: 2,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boardman View Post
I had the 2500c

After having it stop 3 x and in for service each time for 6-8 wks I sold it and got the 8500

I did like the lower profile of the 2500 but it wasn't worth the trouble anymore

Kind of glad it happened now....I love the 8500! So glad I went orange too.


Ok...I have to admint it looks super cool !!!
gettocard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9 October 2012, 11:45 AM   #92
Pitzer666
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: China
Posts: 2
The 2500 is better for dress and the 8500 is better as a time toll, you can decide what to choose according to what do you want.
Pitzer666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 October 2012, 08:12 PM   #93
Kaprish
"TRF" Member
 
Kaprish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Real Name: Rishi
Location: Dubai, UAE
Watch: Rolex Daytona 1165
Posts: 84
After weeks of indecision, I went for the 2500
- v v limited availability
- suits my slimmer wrist better
- works with both suits and with jeans (the 8500 is gorgeous but too thick)
- can always go for the 8500 next year as the casual watch (once there is relative peace at home re the topic of getting another watch)
- love the sea horse creature
Attached Images
File Type: jpg image.jpg (78.2 KB, 880 views)
Kaprish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 October 2012, 07:28 AM   #94
alnilam78
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Real Name: Roberto
Location: Italy
Posts: 3
...sorry for the bad photo...this is my Planet Ocean 42mm 8500!!!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Omega Planet Ocean.jpg (99.9 KB, 860 views)
alnilam78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 October 2012, 01:29 PM   #95
improviz
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tejas
Watch: your step
Posts: 2,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaglehusky View Post
As improviz said, it's the QOS LE 45mm PO (222.30.46.20.01.001), and the dial resembles the grip of a Walther PPK, James Bond's weapon of choice.
If anyone's interested, there's one of those up for sale on TZ:
Quantum of Solace on the block:
__________________
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 18 October 2012, 08:22 PM   #96
Jay Z
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Uk
Posts: 1
Went to an AD a few weeks ago to buy a 2500 tried on a 8500 and it was a 8500 from that moment. Couldn't get it at the price I wanted so I went home done some digging on the net and its being delivered early next week.
Jay Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 October 2012, 06:14 AM   #97
halls1030
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3
Spent the last two weeks looking at the 2500 & 8500 models...

I personally didn't notice the bigger case on the 8500 as much as some of you note here. I will say that unless you're a bigger guy the 45mm is a big & HEAVY watch. I have a 7.5 wrist and it was big. Definitely felt the "heft" of the 45mm when wearing it.

What I did notice that sold me on the 8500 was the following:

-The Sapphire Crystal back showing the new 8500 movement. It just looks "rich" - it's another focal point of the watch.

-The lumes on the 8500 being a pure white on the face & hands whereas the 2500's definitely have a light green tint.

-The ceramic bezel (I was worried about the "greyish" look on the 8500) but I truly don't even notice it - it blends perfectly into the overall body of the watch for me)

Just my 2 cents...
halls1030 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 October 2012, 10:22 AM   #98
maeisenberg
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: mark eisenberg
Location: long island, ny
Watch: AP ROO Themes
Posts: 77
The 8500 would be my choice, you get a lot of watch for the money. It has a great wrist presence and is very versatile.
maeisenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 November 2012, 01:20 PM   #99
GEO_79
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: Georgian
Location: Constanta_Romania
Watch: 216570 Polar
Posts: 904
PO 8500 for me
GEO_79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 November 2012, 09:13 AM   #100
SubmarinerMan
"TRF" Member
 
SubmarinerMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Real Name: Matt
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Watch: 16610LV
Posts: 1,046
Deffo the 2500 for me. Although I'm biased for sentimental reasons.
__________________
Rolex Submariner 16610 LV 'M'. Rolex Submariner 16610 'M'. Rolex Sea-Dweller 126600. Omega Seamaster 2226.80.00. Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 2907.50.91 .
SubmarinerMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 November 2012, 02:02 AM   #101
ludicree
"TRF" Member
 
ludicree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Earth
Watch: Rolex Sports 5+6
Posts: 154
I find the 8500 very high. Too high. Tried it and was surprised by the nice feel on the wrist. Somehow the watch works out good even if it looks too high.

The overall weight with steel bracelet was too much for me. The 170g of a Seamaster 2500 are the max that I can use for longer periods.

Looked for the Liquidmetal with ceramic version of the 2500 PO. Found it. Very expensive, but a nice watch. Did not take it.
__________________
Best regards,
Andi
ludicree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 November 2012, 01:32 AM   #102
AK797
2024 Pledge Member
 
AK797's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,066
I wouldnt sell my SubC to get one but I would buy the 8500, altho Im liking the new SMPc more and more...
AK797 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 November 2012, 02:04 AM   #103
RolexDivers
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: BIG BEAR, CA
Posts: 1,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrior View Post
If you end up doing it, you're making a very good decision in my opinion regardless of which PO you choose. I think the ceramic subs are waaaay too shiny. They don't look at all "classic" to me... and are extremely blingy. Almost too "fashion" looking.

.....
Despite the shortcomings you have listed, there is one problem: They are SUBs! 5 yrs from now you will see the power of the subs as their 2ndhand prices go up and up, while the same can not be said so strongly for the PO....

But if the SUB is not singing to the OP, then that's all that matters. Your $$ is way too precious to be sunk into something that doesn't make you smile. So whether you buy a PO or a SEIKO, you will be making a better decision than sticking with the SUB-C.
RolexDivers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 November 2012, 02:54 PM   #104
openwheelracing
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Glendora
Posts: 215
2500 and I find no need to replace it with 8500.

A 8500 is in the near future, but definitely not from another PO. Likely an Aqua Terra.
__________________
Omega Planet Ocean 42mm 2201.50
Rolex Submariner 16610LV
openwheelracing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 November 2012, 07:01 AM   #105
gnuyork
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 3,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by openwheelracing View Post
2500 and I find no need to replace it with 8500.

A 8500 is in the near future, but definitely not from another PO. Likely an Aqua Terra.
Same here. I MUCH prefer the 2500 to the 8500, however I really want an 8500 AT - blue dial. Or the rose gold with slate dial, but that's into rolex money league.

gnuyork is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 7 November 2012, 11:09 AM   #106
gnuyork
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 3,245
and another:
gnuyork is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 9 November 2012, 11:43 PM   #107
Athas
"TRF" Member
 
Athas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Watch: SD,Daytona,P233,PO
Posts: 163
8500
Athas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 November 2012, 05:10 AM   #108
indy78
"TRF" Member
 
indy78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Watch: 116233 Serti
Posts: 204
Most Accurate

I have both the 2500C and the new 8500 Planet Ocean. The 8500 is by far the most accurate automatic. Both movements are more accurate then my Rolex and only my Breitling Super Quartz is more accurate than the 8500.
__________________
Rolex 116233 Serti; Omega 300 Master Co-Axial 41mm Titanium; Breitling Aerospace EVO; Omega Planet Ocean 600M Steel on Steel 42mm"
indy78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 November 2012, 01:15 PM   #109
How
"TRF" Member
 
How's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Melbourne
Watch: 16610, Tudor 1960
Posts: 1,554
8500 me too!

I'm addition to the movement, I love the ceramic bezel.
How is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 November 2012, 11:53 PM   #110
dhl1010
"TRF" Member
 
dhl1010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Real Name: Hui
Location: Singapore
Watch: Omega
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by indy78 View Post
I have both the 2500C and the new 8500 Planet Ocean. The 8500 is by far the most accurate automatic. Both movements are more accurate then my Rolex and only my Breitling Super Quartz is more accurate than the 8500.
I thought of getting the Rolex GMT... Is 8500 planet ocean more accurate then the GMT?
dhl1010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 November 2012, 05:59 AM   #111
dsio
"TRF" Member
 
dsio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Real Name: Ashley
Location: Brisbane
Watch: Rolex Sub 1680 '79
Posts: 2,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhl1010 View Post
I thought of getting the Rolex GMT... Is 8500 planet ocean more accurate then the GMT?
Accuracy is down to how its regulated and worn, both are accurate movements, but the 8500 is technically superior in every aspect, which is to be expected for a 25 year newer movement.
__________________
-- Omega Seamaster Grand-Lux Stepped Pie-Pan 14K Gold OJ2627 '53 --
-- Omega Cal 320 Chronograph 18K Gold OT2872 '58 --
-- Omega Cal 321 Speedmaster Pro 145.012 '67 --
-- Rolex Submariner 1680 "Ghost" '79 --
-- Rolex SS Daytona 116520 '04 --
dsio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 November 2012, 06:28 AM   #112
OptyCT
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 11
I own the 2500, but may pick up an 8500.
OptyCT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 November 2012, 07:54 AM   #113
thran
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal
Watch: PO
Posts: 19
I personally love the 8500 but the thickness is the only issue i have.
thran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 November 2012, 02:44 AM   #114
RolexPete
"TRF" Member
 
RolexPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Peter
Location: Massachusetts
Watch: Dad's 14060
Posts: 1,936
2500C for me (just got yesterday).

__________________

1996 Submariner 14060* - 1972 Datejust 1601
1972 Oyster Perpetual 1002 - 1978 Oysterquartz 17000
Omega Seamaster 2265.80 - Omega Seamaster 300 166.0324
*RIP PAL 1942-2015
RolexPete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 November 2012, 09:11 PM   #115
Behtahan
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 83
You need to try both on your wrist to see which has a better appeal. You won't go wrong with this test.
Behtahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 January 2013, 04:25 AM   #116
jokr82
"TRF" Member
 
jokr82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Brasil
Posts: 1,048
For me 8500!

And I must say, doesn´t matter with cloth are you wearing, matches with anything!

Suits, t-shirt, etc...

Mine says Hi!



jokr82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 January 2013, 01:10 PM   #117
Submarino
"TRF" Member
 
Submarino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Mr. H
Location: Dallas
Watch: them for me!
Posts: 7,180
2500 of course. I got it back in December and I just can't take it off. This watch is one of the most accurate I've ever owned.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ImageUploadedByTapatalk1358565041.935773.jpg (86.4 KB, 404 views)
__________________
WATCHES ARE THE NEW CURRENCY!/ MEMBER 27491/OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED OLD TIMER /AP OWNERS CLUB MEMBER

Instagram @watchcollectinglifestyle

Submarino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 January 2013, 06:49 AM   #118
solesman
"TRF" Member
 
solesman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 525
PO LM LE. Best of both worlds.

Love mine.
solesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 January 2013, 07:10 AM   #119
ticktock 2
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: uk
Watch: omega PO LM LE
Posts: 77
Don,t think it matters 2500 or 8500 . They are all good. Here,s my POLM 42 2500
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 019.jpg (75.9 KB, 321 views)
ticktock 2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 January 2013, 07:19 AM   #120
wantonebad
2024 Pledge Member
 
wantonebad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Watch: 126600, 116500LN
Posts: 12,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by double View Post
If it's a dressy diver you are after then go with the 2500. It has a more classic look and not as bulky. I think the 8500 has more of a tool watch appearance when comparing it to the 2500, except for the display case back on the new model.
X2

I agree
__________________
"I'm kind of a big deal...
on a fairly irrelevant social media site
that falsely inflates my fragile ego"
wantonebad 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

Asset Appeal

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.