ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Dhiren · 5 October 2019, 07:39 PM

Watchfinder & Co. Explains Why the Omega Seamaster Trumps the Rolex Submariner https://hypebeast.com/2019/10/watchf...mparison-video

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

JonaG · 5 October 2019, 07:45 PM

I’m with Paul Thorpe on this one. Seamaster nice watch but no Submariner.

Shame he didn’t use the 114060 Sub (no date) image instead of the Hulk.

~4:35

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=koCbBcGU1EE

Chester01 · 6 October 2019, 10:36 AM

I have a sub, and its a classic. But the seamaster wins. Its simply a better and more accurate movement. And in today days and age importantly, far more anti magnetic. The sub is the more classic piece, but "better" ...if we are being objective, seamaster winds hands down.

wiem0014 · 6 October 2019, 01:59 PM

I'm not saying the SMP is "better". But the Hulk is certainly not 4x"Better". And the No Date is not 2.5"Better".

The value on the SMP is just incredible and I don't think that can be questioned.

JR16 · 6 October 2019, 10:10 PM

The watches are different enough that I don’t think it’s fair to say “which one is better”. On bracelet, the SMP is signif larger than the SubC (I own both) and the wave dial isn’t for everyone. FWIW, my SubC (both LN and LV) are more accurate than my seamaster 300, but we are talking about a couple seconds per day. I love the seamaster on rubber (not a fan of the SubC on anything but bracelet) and it’s more “fun” to look at. What is indisputable, is that the price point of the seamaster is wonderful - a ton of watch for the value.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

uniqueMR · 7 October 2019, 01:20 AM

Rolex is Rolex.

othertbone · 13 October 2019, 06:53 AM

Hahahahahaha good one!

jnewell · 13 October 2019, 07:34 AM

Might be better to do a video on which Sub is better than which other Sub, although it’d be more like a feature-length film and an opinion call in the end anyway. Personally, I like the four digit refs better than the fives and I wouldn’t want any of the sixes, even though they are certainly better timekeepers.

Comparing the Subs to the SMPs is inevitable but unproductive in my opinion, but YMMV!

Bizcut1 · 13 October 2019, 10:10 AM

Love my Sub C, it's a part of me by now.

That said, love the &^%$#* out of the Seamaster, too!

Ben

5 October 2019, 07:39 PM	#1
Dhiren "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: India Posts: 514	Interesting Video on watchfinder Watchfinder & Co. Explains Why the Omega Seamaster Trumps the Rolex Submariner https://hypebeast.com/2019/10/watchf...mparison-video Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

5 October 2019, 07:45 PM	#2
JonaG "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Real Name: Jonathan Location: East Watch: ... Posts: 1,171	I’m with Paul Thorpe on this one. Seamaster nice watch but no Submariner. Shame he didn’t use the 114060 Sub (no date) image instead of the Hulk. ~4:35 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=koCbBcGU1EE __________________ Yacht-Master 126622, GMT-Master II 16710, Submariner 114060, Sea-Dweller 16600, Panerai Luminor PAM111 Lange Saxonia Moon Phase 384.029, Tudor Black Bay Harrods M79230G.

7 October 2019, 01:20 AM	#6
uniqueMR 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2018 Location: USA Watch: P A T E K Posts: 4,694	Rolex is Rolex. __________________ A. Lange & Sohne \| Audemars Piguet \| F.P.Journe \| Omega \| Patek Philippe \| Rolex \| Tudor \| ...and Othersss

13 October 2019, 07:34 AM	#8
jnewell "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Bahston Posts: 127	Might be better to do a video on which Sub is better than which other Sub, although it’d be more like a feature-length film and an opinion call in the end anyway. Personally, I like the four digit refs better than the fives and I wouldn’t want any of the sixes, even though they are certainly better timekeepers. Comparing the Subs to the SMPs is inevitable but unproductive in my opinion, but YMMV! __________________ 1680 Submariner ~ 5513 Submariner ~ 16710 GMT Master II ~ 145.00.22 Speedmaster Professional ~ 2531.80 Seamaster Professional ~ Marathon TSAR

6 October 2019, 10:36 AM	#3
Chester01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: East Coast Watch: 16610 Posts: 4,933	I have a sub, and its a classic. But the seamaster wins. Its simply a better and more accurate movement. And in today days and age importantly, far more anti magnetic. The sub is the more classic piece, but "better" ...if we are being objective, seamaster winds hands down.

6 October 2019, 01:59 PM	#4
wiem0014 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2019 Location: Minneapolis, MN Watch: 126710BLRO Posts: 236	I'm not saying the SMP is "better". But the Hulk is certainly not 4x"Better". And the No Date is not 2.5"Better". The value on the SMP is just incredible and I don't think that can be questioned.

6 October 2019, 10:10 PM	#5
JR16 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: USA Posts: 6,186	The watches are different enough that I don’t think it’s fair to say “which one is better”. On bracelet, the SMP is signif larger than the SubC (I own both) and the wave dial isn’t for everyone. FWIW, my SubC (both LN and LV) are more accurate than my seamaster 300, but we are talking about a couple seconds per day. I love the seamaster on rubber (not a fan of the SubC on anything but bracelet) and it’s more “fun” to look at. What is indisputable, is that the price point of the seamaster is wonderful - a ton of watch for the value. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

13 October 2019, 06:53 AM	#7
othertbone Banned Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: Florida, USA Watch: Rolex/AP/Vin Omega Posts: 1,972	Hahahahahaha good one!

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