Omega Seamaster GMT (2234.50) or Tudor GMT?

[shedlock2000]

Hi All,

I am considering a new watch. I currently own the NTTD, but I have never really got on with it because it has no date or gmt function (both which I use daily); in addition, it is almost impossible to see in low-light situations. Accordingly, it's pretty but relatively useless at its job.

I have surveyed the forums and there are a number of posts asking for Tudor GMT to non-GMT Seamasters, but nothing about the 2234.50 -- they seem quite unpopular (apart from the great white, which I don't really like)

My dalliance with GMTs is long and a bit disappointing. I have owned several 1675s and 16753s -- all of which seem to give up on me for the same reason (stalling) and require thousands in Rolex servicing. I have had some Bremont GMTs, but they're really thick and I like a bracelet (Bremont's bracelets don't match their case). I have had a 2535.80.00, which I liked apart from the blue dial, the short gmt hand, the diver's bezel, and the fact that it was the ugliest watch I have ever owned. I have also tried a Seiko SNR033 (for about a week before I sold it), but I can't get into the spring drive thing and the cases are much too big.

I have also tried the Tudor, but I found that it had a funny 'top-heavy' balance and flopped around on my wrist dreadfully. I am willing to give it another go, though, as it ticks all the boxes. I'd consider a 216570, but they're too much coin for me at the moment and the bezel isn't functional.

My perfect watch would be a 1675 with a less fragile movement in it (I have had 4 now -- all of them failed in the same way). They are the perfect blend of proportions and aesthetic preferences for me. However, they are not really an option, as I have a pretty hard life, they're very expensive, and in my experience, not terribly reliable.

Accordingly, I am looking for something that is more robust and also a traveller's gmt around 40/41mm. So I am considering going back to the Tudor or trying a 50th Anniversary Omega, which I believe has a modified ETA movement in it. The Tudor has their new movement which has suffered from some date wheel issue. However, a 12 month old Tudor (with a brand new movement to fix the date wheel issue) is the same price as an SMP300GMT -- and is 24 years younger! I don't really care about the vintage thing; I like watches because of the way they look not their vintage. Nevertheless, I am a bit reluctant to go with the Omega due to the bezel and wavy dial (neither of which I like).

The question is, which which would you choose and why? The Tudor or the SMP?



(I'd love to post photos -- I have lots to share -- but since we left Tapatalk, I have been unable to do so because the website always objects to my photo sizes for some reason).

[TimeLord2]

I have a 1675/3 GMT, which I do adore but as you say, it would be nice to have working lume on the watch and something I like to look at. I too am interested in the OSM 2234.50 and did try one on at the Real Real that wasn't working, and had no box or papers but they still wanted $2800 for it. Nope! IMHO, it does look nice in the flesh and fit my 7.25" wrist perfectly.

There are actually 3 versions. The 2534.50 with butterfly clasp, 2234.50 with standard bracelet and clasp and I think just a brushed finish, and a 2536.50 special limited edition Jerry Lopez version with a graphic on the case back showing the Hawaiian islands and some hibiscus flowers. He was a surfing legend back in the day. I like that last one most of all but they don't come up often with only 999 produced. I will be interested to see comments on this topic too.

[Harvey_D]

Between those two id take the tudor probably but im holding out hope for bb58 gmt.

I've tried on a Tudor GMT on a nato and have also tried the NTTD. I am also looking for a nice travelers watch as well and love the Pepsi look but have been disappointed as there seems to be not a lot of affordable/attainable options out there. There are a lot of Desk-GMT's that dont have real GMT movements (jumping hour hand etc) and can be fragile, which is disappointing. I recommend taking a look at the worldtimer from omega, they can go for less than MSRP when used and I believe the CEO of Omega wears one (at least on one video I saw in fall 2021) and they look great in person. Also, iirc grand seiko make real GMT movements and some of their GMT models can be quite affordable, dont know if they are tough though.

I wasn't terribly impressed with the Tudor in person (especially on the stock nato strap) as the legibility of the dial doesn't perform as well as the GMT Master II IMHO. I was also not terribly impressed with the newer GMT explorer as I cant really relate to cave exploration and the orange 24hr hand isnt my cup of tea. Also anyone who's been intimately involved with rock knows that a Rolex+Rock would not mix...

You may also want to take a look at Monta, and farer (who dont make real GMT's but have some cool dials nonetheless)

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Harvey_D

I've tried on a Tudor GMT on a nato and have also tried the NTTD. I am also looking for a nice travelers watch as well and love the Pepsi look but have been disappointed as there seems to be not a lot of affordable/attainable options out there.

Agreed. The options for real traveller's GMTs are very few. Kenisi are selling their GMT movement elsewhere, now, so we might see some more options come up like the new Norquain GMT (https://www.norqain.com/watches/adve...mt-41mm-green/). I am not a fan of their colourways, though. I really just want a black dial with a red or orange hand -- all this bruised-up look with the blue and black isn't my bag.

Originally Posted by Harvey_D

I wasn't terribly impressed with the Tudor in person (especially on the stock nato strap) as the legibility of the dial doesn't perform as well as the GMT Master II IMHO. I was also not terribly impressed with the newer GMT explorer as I cant really relate to cave exploration and the orange 24hr hand isn't my cup of tea. Also anyone who's been intimately involved with rock knows that a Rolex+Rock would not mix...

The proportions of the 1675 are my favourite, and I am not a fan of the 16710s. The 116710s carry the proportions, but lose much in feel -- I get the way that Rolex went, but it's not my thing, to be honest (I once had a GMTIIC and I didn't really enjoy it as much as I should have. I also owned the Tudor once -- there is a long write up on my thoughts here: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?p=8909099. I rather like the piece to look at and I liked the readabilty of the dial and the snowflake hands. I was disappointed by a non-lumed bezel, but get their move to the aluminum bezel. What bothered me most was the fit and the top-heaviness. It's quite chunky too, at 15mm thick. I enjoyed it on the leather, but on the bracelet, it was weird and flopped about oddly.

Originally Posted by Harvey_D

You may also want to take a look at Monta, and farer (who don't make real GMT's but have some cool dials nonetheless)

I have considered Monta, but I don't like their crowns or the kinked GMT hand; they're also not a traveller's GMT. I reached out to them to see if they would lume their bezel, as they have for their other bezeled watches -- they will not, and they were quite rude about it, which surprised me.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

I have a 1675/3 GMT, which I do adore but as you say, it would be nice to have working lume on the watch and something I like to look at. I too am interested in the OSM 2234.50 and did try one on at the Real Real that wasn't working, and had no box or papers but they still wanted $2800 for it. Nope! IMHO, it does look nice in the flesh and fit my 7.25" wrist perfectly.

Yeah, they are a well proportioned watch, I think. They fit well and fly under the radar a bit. My only real reservation is with the bezel font -- which is horrendous -- the SM300 is much better; I am not sure what possessed them to chunk out the numbers the way they did. There are some nice aftermarket bezels, though, which massively improve the looks of the piece.

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

There are actually 3 versions. The 2534.50 with butterfly clasp, 2234.50 with standard bracelet and clasp and I think just a brushed finish, and a 2536.50 special limited edition Jerry Lopez version with a graphic on the case back showing the Hawaiian islands and some hibiscus flowers. He was a surfing legend back in the day. I like that last one most of all but they don't come up often with only 999 produced. I will be interested to see comments on this topic too.

I didn't know about the special, that's interesting but not my bag: I never take my watch off and the caseback is, thusly, irrelevant! I have seen several with the Speedmaster bracelet; do these have a different number? I don't like the non-tapering links on the SM bracelet at all and would prefer one with the Speedmaster bracelet. My searches seem to show the same 2234.50 number but with various bracelet options.


BTW, loving the handle! Big Whovian here! LOL

[Yellowduke]

I recently went through a similar decision and went with the Omega 2534.50. I just prefer the sword hands and the Seamaster case.

[TimeLord2]

I did indeed buy one just recently, a 2534.50. I like it but it is probably something you should try on first to see if you like it. The lume is great on this watch! It burns bright into the wee hours of the morning. That was definitely one of the criteria for this watch—solid lume. And it does not disappoint, even if it is somewhat old. It is a travelers GMT too so very easy to set and change the date.

[TimeAZ]

I'd pick the Tudor GMT without hesitation.

[subdownunder]

Expand your horizons and check out the vast range of Grand Seiko GMT's

They are leading the rest on design and models at the moment.

Plus if you travel they will not make you look like a neon sign saying rob me.

Also a JLC Reverso duel time travel is a nice take on the GMT theme

[Krash]

I wouldn’t get an Omega Worldtimer. All those will be rendered inaccurate when legislation passes in US to do away with turning clocks back in the fall.

They’re already wrong half the year anyway, so that’s always been something I don’t like about them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Krash

I wouldn’t get an Omega Worldtimer. All those will be rendered inaccurate when legislation passes in US to do away with turning clocks back in the fall.

They’re already wrong half the year anyway, so that’s always been something I don’t like about them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am a bit of a bezel guy -- the Worldtimer is too dressy for me, really (and I am not sure that it would put up with the abuse I give watches -- I have a pretty rough life). Can you elaborate on why the Worldtimers are wrong half the year? Are you not able to adjust the world time back half an hour? Is the time constrained to the hour hand somehow? I am not sure of how they operate -- my experience with GMTs is to jumping hour hands and Bezels.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by subdownunder

Expand your horizons and check out the vast range of Grand Seiko GMT's

They are leading the rest on design and models at the moment.

Plus if you travel they will not make you look like a neon sign saying rob me.

Also a JLC Reverso duel time travel is a nice take on the GMT theme

I have considered some Seikos, but they are too big at 45mm and 15/16mm thick. The new Seiko SBGM247 would be ok if they did it in black, but they only offer olive and blue (I hate blue watches). The GS are also too big and too shiny; I am a bit of a tool watch guy -- too much bling isn't my thing.

The Reversos DT are nice as a dress watch, but much of my life is spent wrenching on Land Rovers or putting up cedar roofs on heritage properties -- I need something pretty robust.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by shedlock2000

I am a bit of a bezel guy -- the Worldtimer is too dressy for me, really (and I am not sure that it would put up with the abuse I give watches -- I have a pretty rough life). Can you elaborate on why the Worldtimers are wrong half the year? Are you not able to adjust the world time back half an hour? Is the time constrained to the hour hand somehow? I am not sure of how they operate -- my experience with GMTs is to jumping hour hands and Bezels.

I’m not sure I’d consider the Worldtimer a dress watch. Quite the contrary, at 43mm it’s quite large for a dress watch. Plus, it’s way too complicated. In general a dress watch should have a clean, simple look without complications.

A Worldtimer keeps track of all 24 time zones at once, and lists a corresponding city for each time zone. For example, New York, London, Paris, Tokyo, Beijing, Dubai, Moscow, etc.

Problem is half of those don’t have Daylight Savings time and never change their clocks. So when you look at a Worldtimer, you’re never quite sure it’s really accurate on a city by city basis.

When you shift the Worldtimer setting by 1 hour to adjust time for NY, LA or London, then it’s not reflecting the right time in Tokyo, Beijing, Moscow or Dubai (none of those countries change their clocks).

Compounding the problem is that different countries change to daylight savings time on different dates, so in March and October, those Worldtimers are totally messed up.

Finally, the USA is doing away with changing the clocks altogether. We’ll only be on Daylights savings (not standard time), so that renders the Worldtimer even more screwed up. They’ll need to completely re-design them.

The worldtimer complication is really cool, but it’s only useful if every country on the planet agrees to stick with standard time. An Apple Watch or G-Shock can accurately keep track of time in all cities if that’s what you really need. A GMT is great for keeping track of two time zones.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk UI

[AEC]

I'm surprised the new Black Bay Pro hasn't come up in this conversation yet (or did I miss it in the responses above?). If I'm looking for a traveler's GMT on a bracelet then this is probably my pick right now.



Longines also just introduced a new model featuring traveler's GMT functionality.

[TimeLord2]

Originally Posted by AEC

I'm surprised the new Black Bay Pro hasn't come up in this conversation yet (or did I miss it in the responses above?). If I'm looking for a traveler's GMT on a bracelet then this is probably my pick right now.

Yes the new Tudor GMT is quite nice but definitely more like an Explorer. It too has a fixed bezel and a thickness of 14.6mm. COSC certified. It is quite nice and uses the same movement as the Tudor Pepsi GMT. I do like this one. more here in this YouTube video if anyone is interested. https://youtu.be/0WPBj59LIEg

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

Yes the new Tudor GMT is quite nice but definitely more like an Explorer. It too has a fixed bezel and a thickness of 14.6mm. COSC certified. It is quite nice and uses the same movement as the Tudor Pepsi GMT. I do like this one. more here in this YouTube video if anyone is interested. https://youtu.be/0WPBj59LIEg

I do very much like the look of the Tudor, but the watch is unbearably thick at 14.6mm -- especially on a 39mm case. Because Tudor use the same movement in the Pro, I am assuming it will suffer from the same balance issues (top heaviness), perhaps more so given it's smaller case size. I haven't tried one on yet, obviously, as I don't imagine any ADs in Canada having them yet (and the nearest one is 300 miles way anyway).

I do think this is a sharp watch, though. Such a shame it's not 13.5mm thick.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Krash

I’m not sure I’d consider the Worldtimer a dress watch. Quite the contrary, at 43mm it’s quite large for a dress watch. Plus, it’s way too complicated. In general a dress watch should have a clean, simple look without complications.

That's a fair comment. I should have been clearer: Because I am only interested in watches with bezels, I consider anything without one to be a dress watch (or a pilot's watch -- which also don't really interest me). You are correct, this is is not a dress watch in the truest sense, but I don't really consider it a tool watch either.

Originally Posted by Krash

A Worldtimer keeps track of all 24 time zones at once, and lists a corresponding city for each time zone. For example, New York, London, Paris, Tokyo, Beijing, Dubai, Moscow, etc.

Problem is half of those don’t have Daylight Savings time and never change their clocks. So when you look at a Worldtimer, you’re never quite sure it’s really accurate on a city by city basis.

When you shift the Worldtimer setting by 1 hour to adjust time for NY, LA or London, then it’s not reflecting the right time in Tokyo, Beijing, Moscow or Dubai (none of those countries change their clocks).

Compounding the problem is that different countries change to daylight savings time on different dates, so in March and October, those Worldtimers are totally messed up.

Ahhhh! Yeah, I see the predicament. I didn't know how it worked -- the only Worldtimers to which I have paid much attention are the external bezel type (Enicar, CW C65WT), so this type have escaped my attention. My interest in watches is really only on those with a bezel. LOL

Originally Posted by Krash

The worldtimer complication is really cool, but it’s only useful if every country on the planet agrees to stick with standard time. An Apple Watch or G-Shock can accurately keep track of time in all cities if that’s what you really need. A GMT is great for keeping track of two time zones.

I agree, it's a very interesting complication. To be honest, and as much as I would miss the automatic movement, if the Apple watch did not need recharging, I would own one now. I have had one in the past, and I hate having to take my watch on and off at all -- to do so once a night and to sleep without it is anathema. I did a solid two days before I sent it back! However, functionally speaking, it is clearly the way forwards.

[Krash]

I get 24 hours out of my Apple Watch 7. Only takes about 20 to 30 mins to get to 100%. Newer versions are a huge improvement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by Krash

I get 24 hours out of my Apple Watch 7. Only takes about 20 to 30 mins to get to 100%. Newer versions are a huge improvement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's interesting to know, but I still have to take it off! I am looking forward to when they are kinetically or solar charged and I don't have to take it off at all. I imagine we're not that far off that now -- I have seen kick-starter campaigns for kinetically charged wrist watches already.

[ofre]

Both watches are very good but the Tudor GMT has always been a watch I really like.

[shedlock2000]

Here’s what I went with in the end. Full set from SwissWatchExpo — a bit more than I was hoping to pay, but everything seems in good order… apart from the box, but this vintage fall apart when you look at them anyway! There’s a bit of an issue with import duties, but I’ll discuss that when I’ve resolved it!







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1William]

Congratulations.

[G3Z]

Stunner of a watch. Congratulations!

[shedlock2000]

Thanks!:)

I will review SWE when I resolve the shipping issue.

[carlosdominguez01]

Congratulations!

[TimeLord2]

Looks great but as you know I am biased! It's been a few months for me now and still love it. Funny that you have a 16753 too!

[shedlock2000]

[QUOTE=TimeLord2;12100807]Looks great /QUOTE]

Thanks, I’m actually quite surprised how different it looks in person to the way they look in photos.

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

Looks great /QUOTE] Funny that you have a 16753 too!

Sadly, I don’t have the 16753 any more. It was a mistake to sell it, but I needed funds to complete my Masters. I sold it only 4 years ago for $6,900 CAD, and they seem to be fetching $20,000US or more now. I never seem to sell anything well (I had a 2007 16710 with the 3186 movement in it and traded it in with an AD for a 116710 and only got $3,000 in trade!. My 116710 I sold to finish my bachelors and only got $7,000CAD for that too)!

I think it’s fair to say that the 16753 was the prettiest watch I’ve ever owned, but I’ve had quite a bit of trouble with the 1575gnt movements. Both my 16753 and my 1675 stalled and after repeated repairs by RSC never seemed to run for long before they stalled again (I assumed my life is a bit too rough for them).




The Omega is surprising me. The 1675/753 is the most comfortable watch I’ve ever owned, I can get the bracelets to fit perfectly and they’re incredibly well balanced, but the 2234.50 is the second most comfortable watch I’ve owned — way more comfortable than the 2535.80, which had a different movement and seemed not to be as well balanced. I’ve owned many watches, but the 2535.80 was my least favourite (I never got over the blue dial and diving bezel) — I only had it a month or so before trading it; the 2234.50 is a massive improvement in terms of both looks and fit.



As I get older, I appreciate lume more and more. Without any exaggeration, this 2234.50 has the best lume of any watch I’ve ever owned — it’s a magnificent thing at night. My only criticism is the lack of a lume pip. The photo below was taken with only an iPhone — no fancy exposure or iris settings.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeLord2]

You have had some amazing watches! Glad you are enjoying this one. I'm also surprised by how long the lume lasts, basically all night. Not so with this one, completely dead lume. I got this 1675/3 from my Dad in 1989. It's gone through various stages of upkeep but since it was serviced last year it's less than 1 second fast per day. A watch I would never be able to afford myself with current pricing and 3 kids—actually young adults at this point but still at home.

[shedlock2000]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

I got this 1675/3 from my Dad in 1989. It's gone through various stages of upkeep but since it was serviced last year it's less than 1 second fast per day. A watch I would never be able to afford myself with current pricing and 3 kids—actually young adults at this point but still at home.

You have such a lovely watch and it’s provenance makes it invaluable; such a constant reminder of your father would be a great honour. The 1675/3s are stunning pieces and you are very lucky to have such a lovely watch.

I have realised that its unlikely that I’ll have any chance of getting back into a 1675 or 16753. I find them to be a much more proportioned watch than the 2234.50 with a more sophisticated style. However, they’re also 30/40 years older and a touch less robust. I shall have to make do with my lesser (but still remarkable) Omega.

In some ways, I think it is a more suitable watch for me and my lifestyle, but we’ll have to wait and see!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jarecki]

Originally Posted by Krash

I’m not sure I’d consider the Worldtimer a dress watch. Quite the contrary, at 43mm it’s quite large for a dress watch. Plus, it’s way too complicated. In general a dress watch should have a clean, simple look without complications.

A Worldtimer keeps track of all 24 time zones at once, and lists a corresponding city for each time zone. For example, New York, London, Paris, Tokyo, Beijing, Dubai, Moscow, etc.

Problem is half of those don’t have Daylight Savings time and never change their clocks. So when you look at a Worldtimer, you’re never quite sure it’s really accurate on a city by city basis.

When you shift the Worldtimer setting by 1 hour to adjust time for NY, LA or London, then it’s not reflecting the right time in Tokyo, Beijing, Moscow or Dubai (none of those countries change their clocks).

Compounding the problem is that different countries change to daylight savings time on different dates, so in March and October, those Worldtimers are totally messed up.

Finally, the USA is doing away with changing the clocks altogether. We’ll only be on Daylights savings (not standard time), so that renders the Worldtimer even more screwed up. They’ll need to completely re-design them.

The worldtimer complication is really cool, but it’s only useful if every country on the planet agrees to stick with standard time. An Apple Watch or G-Shock can accurately keep track of time in all cities if that’s what you really need. A GMT is great for keeping track of two time zones.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk UI

I made up my mind, and will be getting the Worldtimer. It’s great looking watch. Also - if the US moves away from changing time twice a year (which I don’t believe - it’s been discussed for decades now, and never happens) I’m pretty sure Omega would offer a dial upgrade / swap to reflect that. It would be a pretty easy thing to do…