Why get an Omega if you can Afford a Rolex..

[M777]

Omega was the brand that got me out of buying and flipping lower end watches at a loss, I still own all my Omegas. They hold value if bought pre-owned very well also

[jay1988]

Just for the record, I own no Omegas and two Rolex watches.

However there is another argument to be made. I've been away from the forum for a while. Got pulled back when some time off work happened to coincide with Basel. I'm not sure if Chris (GMT-Master) is still around but he made an excellent post on this a while back. I tried googling it to find it but cant seem to.

This argument was PO vs Sub and his argument was the PO was actually the better watch. He said the movement was better and he got far more technical than I can but the service interval is longer and service costs significantly lower. If I remember right, the only thing he said was better in the Sub was the glidelock.

An argument can be made that why get a Rolex when you can just get as much watch in the Omega? Are a fool and his money soon parted? Are we all simply seduced by the crown on the dial?

If you put a brand new watch in front of 100 members of this forum and 50 had a watch with the Rolex logo on and 50 thought it was an Omega, I'd bet good money that more of the Rolex group would say they'd buy it. Significantly more.

Again, I'm saying this as a Rolex owner.

[MATCH1969]

Originally Posted by kilyung

Have you looked at the Omega Globemaster just released at Basel?

Image from Internet

Nice

[Mezz72]

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

Get what you want to look at the next decade or two. To me there really is no choice because I have never like Omegas in the past, and now you couldn't pay me to wear one. I really think they're ugly, I hate the whole Bond thing, and I especially can't stand nearly 50 years of bragging about being the moon watch when at least two Speedys failed on Apollo lunar missions. They use a more complex movement that has not proven more accurate, or more reliable, or needs less maintenance, and is limited in where it can be serviced. They are part of the vast corporate beast that is the Swatch Group, don't hold their value very well and shell out so many special editions it's become a joke.

I'm just kidding. Get what you like best (although everything I said is true).

same thoughts, except that I did love omega before

[regnant]

I had Omega once,Seamaster. Although I liked that watch I always wanted to have a Rolex yellow gold.The yellow gold constantly turned green in the bracelet in Omega and had to polish it up. Whereas,DD my first real Rolex never changed it's color and looked more dignified than Omega did
Rolex has it's own league and class and Rolex use solid links whereas Omega doesn't. I have learnt this from forums and for this reason alone I would pick SS Rolex over full gold Omega

[henry333]

Omega is omega ... Rolex is rolex ..

[superdog]

People keep talking about resale as an answer to this query.

I'd imagine that the vast majority of folks buying luxury watches are not taking resale into consideration when making the purchase. Most are buying for life.

Typically it's the WIS community that buys and flips and therefore uses this as a consideration.

Anyway, I like both sets of watches.

But another reason someone might buy an omega is because Rolex does carry a stigma.

Many people think Rolex owners are D bags that are only buying it for the name. Besides, some people really do like to "fly under the radar". And Rolex watches do not do that.

[Makash]

I think its just about preference. Omega IS NOT worse than Rolex in terms of quality or acuraccy. I for example like Rolex more than Omega, but i have never said that Omega was worse than Rolex in anything. Thats it.

[Robert Cross]

For me it's not Rolex vs Omega.....

I just liked the way this one looked.

Bob

[Fiery]

"Why get an Omega if you can Afford a Rolex"

One of the reason could be that Omega has quite a few kind of products that Rolex refuses to build. Like:













I think it's great that you could pick your favorite from a broad variety of brands each offering exciting products.

[Rolex fan 61]

James Bond always wore a rolex as did the author Ian Fleming, the original rolex was an Explorer 1, in fact off screen the current Bond Daniel Craig wears a rolex NOT an omega!!!!

[Robert Cross]

Originally Posted by Rolex fan 61

James Bond always wore a rolex as did the author Ian Fleming, the original rolex was an Explorer 1, in fact off screen the current Bond Daniel Craig wears a rolex NOT an omega!!!!

I ware a Seiko when we're not filming.

Bob

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by Rolex fan 61

James Bond always wore a rolex as did the author Ian Fleming, the original rolex was an Explorer 1, in fact off screen the current Bond Daniel Craig wears a rolex NOT an omega!!!!

Well, yes. That's not exactly a new discovery.

And, actually, Fleming's Bond did not always wear a Rolex. He started to at one point, but before that would wear cheap and disposable watches.

[Oyster99]

Im not really a brand guy but i do think omega watches tend to look like 300-500 dollar watches, except the speedmaster (and maybe 1 more i cant think of at the moment)

[toneafficianado]

DJ 2 in blue Roman or sticks. Or YM blue dial. Two incredible blue dial watches. I agree with you totally about the blue factor.

[Jari from Finland]

It seems that your friend is not a collector but he thinks that each person who buys a more expensive watch than an average watchbuyer couln't have any other watches but that one and only. There are lots of people who have several brands, Omegas, Rolexes, APs and so on. If someone is wearing an Omega on his/hers wrist it does't exclude the person having also other brands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MoreCowdog]

To me, it's about what you want to see on your wrist, and what you like - about 6 months ago I bought my first Rolex, and it was one that I really fell in love with. It just so happens that the watch I really want to own next isn't a Rolex, but a Speedmaster instead. As much as I like Rolex, the Daytona - while it's a great watch, isn't one that sings to me personally, and I don't want to limit myself to only owning one brand of watch.

At the end of the day, either are great watches and most non-WIS or non-wealthy people out there would never dream of spending that kind of money on either a Rolex or an Omega.

[Tan]

Get what sings to you and live carefree without the need to justify your choice to anyone.

[azguy]

Your friend is a fool, I love my SMP's

[GB-man]

Because they make a damn good watch.

[yld2rob]

I have both Rolex and a Omega watches. I love my Seamaster PO. It was my first nice watch and still would not give it up even though I have 2 Subs. I like the fact it has a matte dial and is larger than my Subs wearing at (42mm vs. 40mm) and it is thicker which I like. I think Omega in the last 2-3 years has really put the micro focus on trying to compete on the same level as Rolex and making their watches as high of quality as possible (their prices are starting to reflect this as well). I understand your point though. I have a friend that has a three watches. He has a Panerai, Breitling and a Rolex. He does not like Omega at all.

Get the watch you like. The will be more time to add to your collection down the road.

BTW- If you like a blue dialed watch, it would be had to beat a YM with the blue sunburst dial (this might be my next watch) or a DJ II with the same dial.

[andrewd]

the only Omega I like is the classic speedy. I like how it has remained true to the original design for 50 years. The limited editions every 6 months are tacky and cheapen the brand. The seamaster line also seems to change design so often that it has no soul.

traditionally Omegas have been around half the price of a Rolex and this seems about right when you compare the quality of the watches. Theres no way I would spend Rolex money on an Omega. My brand new speedy is off for warranty service for running 37s/d slow. Even though it is not a COSC watch I would at least expect some basic QC before it leaves the factory.

[Number3]

Originally Posted by Robert Cross

For me it's not Rolex vs Omega.....

I just liked the way this one looked.

Bob

That is a great looking watch.n

[fullcourt]

buy what you like....

[engin33r]

Originally Posted by jay1988

Just for the record, I own no Omegas and two Rolex watches.

However there is another argument to be made. I've been away from the forum for a while. Got pulled back when some time off work happened to coincide with Basel. I'm not sure if Chris (GMT-Master) is still around but he made an excellent post on this a while back. I tried googling it to find it but cant seem to.

This argument was PO vs Sub and his argument was the PO was actually the better watch. He said the movement was better and he got far more technical than I can but the service interval is longer and service costs significantly lower. If I remember right, the only thing he said was better in the Sub was the glidelock.

An argument can be made that why get a Rolex when you can just get as much watch in the Omega? Are a fool and his money soon parted? Are we all simply seduced by the crown on the dial?

If you put a brand new watch in front of 100 members of this forum and 50 had a watch with the Rolex logo on and 50 thought it was an Omega, I'd bet good money that more of the Rolex group would say they'd buy it. Significantly more.

Again, I'm saying this as a Rolex owner.

I own both PO and Sub, and I can tell you my PO has longer power reserve, 60 hrs vs 50hrs. Not that I fully wound them all the time, but with normal wearing the PO tend to last longer.

My PO also has 4 years warranty on the movement, I bought it in 2012 and it still is under warranty until 2016. That is a statement by Omega that they are quite certain about their movement durability.

If you ask my opinion, PO is superior to sub on paper - except for the clasp. The glidelock wins.

If you want bang for your bucks, go for PO. However brand recognition + resale value wise, Rolex wins.

As for the stigma... that is quite spot on. There are occasions where I would go with my PO simply because I don't want to be seen wearing a Rolex.

[Saoirse32]

Originally Posted by Robert Cross

For me it's not Rolex vs Omega.....

I just liked the way this one looked.

Bob

Beautiful watch, love the colors!

[DKRanger22]

Threads like these just go to show you the power of the Rolex brand recognition. To the non WIS, it's the only luxury watch brand that matters. To true watch enthusiasts, we know that there are a number of other fish in the sea.

[warrior]

Now, THAT's a beautiful blue dial. Love the "pie pan" design. IMO, it has a little more flair and is more unique looking compared to the blue Rolex DJs and OPs.

Originally Posted by kilyung

Have you looked at the Omega Globemaster just released at Basel?

Image from Internet

[clock]

Originally Posted by DKRanger22

Threads like these just go to show you the power of the Rolex brand recognition. To the non WIS, it's the only luxury watch brand that matters. To true watch enthusiasts, we know that there are a number of other fish in the sea.

Why do non WIS and many WIS buy Pateks? Prestige.
Let's be honest, value for money would be in a Casio.

[yld2rob]

Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver

Um, if you love blue dials, why not consider the YM? Absolute beauty of a watch and way more of a looker than the Omega IMHO.

Image from Rolex website.

I think that dial is perfect. This may be my next watch!