The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex Watch Reviews

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 15 January 2010, 08:59 AM   #31
SilverTrain
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by slevin kelevra View Post
I have experience of both watches first hand and although the SMP strap feels more sturdy the Sub's strap is made of a far stronger metal. When the Sub is on your wrist you dont even think about if the strap is going to hold up or not. It just feels right!


I also had clasp failure on the SMP.


The SMP is a good watch but its no Rolex !!
I've had a clasp failure on the Sub Oyster bracelet. I was putting on a rucksack and the strap snagged slightly on my Sub and the bracelet just opened up - fliplock and all.

It was only by luck and Spiderman-style reflexes that I caught it before it hit the tarmac.

So: they are not perfect. It shouldn't have happened. The clasp is not otherwise 'loose' and the watch is a 2005 model.
SilverTrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2010, 10:20 AM   #32
cbsmohai
"TRF" Member
 
cbsmohai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Real Name: Travis
Location: Central Texas
Watch: Sub Date 16610
Posts: 284
I'm actually rather disappointed with Omega discontinuing the sword hand 2254. The skeleton hand SMPs (especially the blue) just look hideous imho. The dial is busier (see: almost futuristic looking) and the bracelet to me looks like a style I could easily find on a Fossil, Seiko, etc. I know the materials of the Omega bracelet are high in quality but the look doesn't cut it for me.

That being said, it is a much "better" value if you're looking for a great quality swiss dive watch.
cbsmohai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2010, 03:23 PM   #33
s.justinlee
"TRF" Member
 
s.justinlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Real Name: Justin
Location: california
Posts: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveK View Post
In terms of tech, i'd have to say the seamaster is overpriced, but that's probably due to the COSC certifying. It really isnt worth more than 1/2 the price tag and *should be* on par with ORIS.
how can you say that about the seamaster and not about the sub?
some would argue rolexes are terribly overpriced. it's marketing. its all about perceived value.
s.justinlee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2010, 08:47 PM   #34
blackmsport
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Melb - Australia
Posts: 2,959
Both Sub and Seamaster Professional are overpriced compared to Oris or Breiting.... Like Merc and BMW compared to Lexus (Oris) and Audi (Breitling)
blackmsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2010, 11:16 PM   #35
The GMT Master
"TRF" Member
 
The GMT Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: England
Posts: 8,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by spuds View Post
Excellent.

Unbiased.
Professional.
Accurate.

& Informed.




Thankyou Sir!!!!
Cheers Dan, glad you enjoyed reading it

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkpw View Post
Thanks for the excellent review, Chris, which is reminiscent of the ever popular John Holbrook review, although with a different calibre of Seamaster.

I read his comparison when considering updating my TAG Sports two years ago and although attracted by the many positive attributes and price of the Seamaster, there were a number of aesthetic issues with the Omega offering which made me eventually decide on a Submariner.
  • I'm not a fan of the skeleton hands on the co-ax model, nor the sword hands on the classic 2254.50.00 reviewed by John.
  • The scalloped bezel produces some odd angles to my eye and does not look like it would be that easy to turn. You'll have to forgive me, as I've only held a Seamaster once and did not turn the bezel, so I'm just going on appearances.
  • The red tip to the second hand seems out of place.
  • The waves on the dial are a nice touch, but I prefer the plain gloss of the Sub.
  • The hour markers on your co-ax model are an improvement in my opinion to those on the 2254.50.00, which were too intrusive.
  • The provision of an external HEV at 11 o'clock, compared to the Rolex implementation, looks uncomfortable, rather clunky and far less sophisticated.

So these are a few of the reasons why I could not have a Seamaster on my wrist.

Don't get me wrong, Omega are a great brand and I bought a Speedmaster to compliment my Sub - sadly this has been away for a new bezel and a repair from new for FOUR MONTHS.

So thanks again for taking the time to post your review and nice blog!
Thanks for the reply The Holbrook article is an excellent read, and is always a good starting point in a classic debate like this. As for the watch itself, I can appreciate where you're coming from - I suppose the components that make the watch unique are always going to divide opinion. I have to say, though, it's not until the reference reviewed that the SMP really sang to me - the blue dialled equivalent never quite looked right, and I thought there was a bit too much lume on the sword hands model for my liking. Still, that's what makes watch collecting interesting, no two opinions are ever the same
The GMT Master is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2010, 02:13 AM   #36
slevin kelevra
"TRF" Member
 
slevin kelevra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Scotland
Watch: 14060m
Posts: 631
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTrain View Post
I've had a clasp failure on the Sub Oyster bracelet. I was putting on a rucksack and the strap snagged slightly on my Sub and the bracelet just opened up - fliplock and all.

It was only by luck and Spiderman-style reflexes that I caught it before it hit the tarmac.

So: they are not perfect. It shouldn't have happened. The clasp is not otherwise 'loose' and the watch is a 2005 model.
I didnt say they were perfect mate! Only giving my opinion of both watches.

Im VERY surprised with your clasp story and agree it should not have happened. It certainly sounds like a kinda "one off" scenario though.
slevin kelevra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 February 2010, 03:37 AM   #37
Jason Judd
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: Jason
Location: ny
Posts: 27
I just recently went to an AD in my area and wanted to really look at the bracelets...

I must agree that the Sub's bracelet could be improved with the Glidelock...

Just my opinion...
Jason Judd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 02:04 AM   #38
ErikXIV
"TRF" Member
 
ErikXIV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Erik
Location: Sweden
Watch: Rolex, Candino
Posts: 168
Great review Chris, thanks alot!
ErikXIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 03:53 PM   #39
multimedia
"TRF" Member
 
multimedia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Joe
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,835
Thx for the great review Chris!

The Seamaster really do smile at me, and have done so for quite some time now. But if it came down to which one to choose between (and money wasn't an issue), yeah then I'll probably - 99% sure - go with the Submariner.

I really can't put my finger on it why I would choose the Sub, since I almost like the design of the Omega more. But I guess at the end of the day, the Sub would have more value to me in the long run (not talking money value here). I've already owned a Seamaster, and ended up selling it, something that I'm pretty sure I won't do when I get my hand on a Submariner.

I don't know if this makes any sense what so ever - just me rambling. But I guess for me the Sub is a Rolex and all the history, quality, in-house movement, + all the other "things" that comes with this brand - and the Seamaster is... well, something else.

Thx again for sharing!

Cheers,
Joe
__________________
"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works." - S.J.
multimedia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 05:12 PM   #40
George Ab
"TRF" Member
 
George Ab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: George
Location: Seattle
Watch: One of Them
Posts: 6,924
I have owned both the SMP (2254) and a few Submariners. I enjoyed my SMP; however, I no longer own an SMP (I do own a Broad Arrow) as I simply enjoy the feel and aesthetics of the Sub. The dial is exquisite and the bracelet is quite functional albeit the clasp is not nearly as refined as the SMP. The Sub bracelet is far more scratch resistant from my experience particularly on the clasp.

You make the point that the Sub is not twice the watch as the SMP based on the initial cost. However, you fail to take into account the value of the commodity over time. I have found the Sub appreciates more than the SMP. I have yet to lose money on a Rolex. It is nice to wear a nice watch for a couple years and make a few hundred bucks for the effort. As for the Omega, I recently picked up a near mint Omega Broad Arrow for under $2K when the list is approximately $5K. Thanks for the review and you certainly will stir up some opinions.

All the best,
George
George Ab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 03:52 AM   #41
Ed Rooney
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Annapolis, MD
Watch: Sea-Dweller 16600
Posts: 5,081
I don't think there is a comparison between the modern Sub and Seamaster.

Go back in time to 1972 and compare a Sub Date to a Seamaster 300 and you will have a much tougher choice.
Ed Rooney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 March 2010, 08:52 AM   #42
Cato
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Land of the Lost
Watch: 116610LN
Posts: 2,201
I have to agree with your review.

Objectively the SMP wins.

Subjectively the Subbie wins.

But who is subjective that spends thousands on a watch?
Cato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 July 2014, 06:16 AM   #43
Eric Chan
"TRF" Member
 
Eric Chan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: Eric Chan
Location: Vancouver, BC CAN
Watch: Day-Date 118238
Posts: 8,798
A great thread. Was looking for something like this for a while on this forum. Personally, I have always felt these two watches were a great comparison for one another. I own a Submariner Date 16610 LN and my brother in law owns an Omega 300M and we oten times do our own comparisons.

Would love to see someone do a comparison between the Omega 300M ceramic and the Submariner Date 116610. It would be interesting to see how the Sub fairs against the 300M after the upgrades to the clasp and bracelet. It would probably be a more realistic comparison.
Eric Chan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 July 2014, 06:55 AM   #44
locutus49
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: John
Location: La Jolla, CA
Watch: Platona
Posts: 12,194
Dated review.
locutus49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2014, 06:46 AM   #45
ctkjjk
"TRF" Member
 
ctkjjk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Real Name: Tom
Location: Houston
Watch: Submariner-C Date
Posts: 40
I bought the Sub-C over the Omega PO or the AT - mainly because of two things: (1) the dial design on the new Maxi Dial, and (2) the new steel monobloc case and bracelet. When you compared the two by putting them on, you could really tell a difference in the heft and weight of the two materials. Rolex steel is truly "HEAVY METAL."
ctkjjk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2014, 06:48 AM   #46
ctkjjk
"TRF" Member
 
ctkjjk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Real Name: Tom
Location: Houston
Watch: Submariner-C Date
Posts: 40
Let me be clear: the newer SUB C that was unveiled in 2010.
ctkjjk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2014, 09:36 AM   #47
Vaxe
"TRF" Member
 
Vaxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 2,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus49 View Post
Dated review.
So many threads got necro'd recently...
Vaxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2014, 11:13 AM   #48
Brad737
"TRF" Member
 
Brad737's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Watch: Rolex GMT II
Posts: 81
Fun read. I don't own these 2 particular references. Mine are older. I have a Red 1680 and a 2531.80 "Bond" SMP. I honestly love both watches. They both have pros and cons.

I'd say the Red Sub looks a little more manly, possibly due to me thinking "Holy Crap! I finally have a red Sub!" The Omega is dressier. As far as feel, I agree the Seamaster wins everyday and twice on Sunday. The Omega bracelet is awesome. By comparison, the 9315 feels like a Canal Street Special.

I have worn my Omega while scuba diving. It worked flawlessly. The dial is very readable, and was watertight down to 120~ish feet. I have absolutely zero need for the HEV, but it doesn't bother me that it's there. I have never taken the Sub deeper than arm's depth. I know it can, but it's a frickin' 1680! There's no way I'm chancing anything with such a classic.

Timekeeping is pretty much a draw. I have a great watchmaker nearby who has them running great. One thing that blows my mind though is that the Omega loses time like crazy on my watch winder...a couple minutes a week. I'm guessing I need a different speed or rotation setting. The funny thing is that when I wear it constantly, it keeps fantastic time...usually -1 sec/day on my watch timer. (I usually rotate my watches every week.)

I only have 2 Omegas, the Seamaster Pro and a Speedmaster Pro. They've actually held their value pretty well. But the 2531.80 was one of the models worn by Brosnan in the movies, so that explains why it's held up. But I fully agree. Generally, Omegas lose a lot more value than a Rolex.

I love both watches, and don't foresee selling either. They're two winners for sure.
Brad737 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2017, 05:14 AM   #49
bunkermold
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Real Name: Lou
Location: Midwest US
Watch: DJ36
Posts: 6
Awesome review. Thanks a lot Chris. I think both watches are awesome pieces with great design and functionality/versatility. It really boils down in terms to personal preferences, budgets, and whether you will keep the watch in long term or flip them at certain point of time.
bunkermold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2017, 05:16 AM   #50
moorery2001
"TRF" Member
 
moorery2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Real Name: Ryan
Location: Manchester
Watch: GMT Master II
Posts: 150
Pretty solid comparison. Nice read.
moorery2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 September 2017, 09:31 AM   #51
ILuvSubs
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,005
Nice bump! Chris, I didn't realise you had your own watch blog! Good work
ILuvSubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 September 2017, 03:39 AM   #52
Jack T
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Real Name: Jack
Location: The Triangle
Watch: Several
Posts: 6,614
What a great review, just saw this yesterday, a few years down the road. I have always liked, really liked the look of the Seamaster, and this review supports my impression, a terrific watch.
I don't regret my choices over the last seven years, a Planet Ocean 2500 and a Sub, 14060m. Both are great, but about that Seamaster, I do wonder what if...
__________________
Sub 116613 LN; GMT 116710 LN; Sinn 104R;
Exp 214270; GS SBGM221; Omega AT
Jack T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 September 2017, 03:53 AM   #53
KAHN
"TRF" Member
 
KAHN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 32
I saw Costco is selling Omega's, just saying.....
KAHN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 September 2017, 04:19 AM   #54
todd.hepburn
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Toronto area
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by KAHN View Post
I saw Costco is selling Omega's, just saying.....


Yep. Rolexes too.
todd.hepburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 September 2017, 04:44 AM   #55
Swiss Mad!
"TRF" Member
 
Swiss Mad!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Real Name: Max
Location: UK
Watch: Various
Posts: 3,722
I cant believe 2 things about this thread.

1: It was started in December 2009, it then went dead until July 2014, and then went dead again until August 2017 - how do these threads keep getting re opened after such long time periods laying dormant???

2: In 2009 A Rolex Submariner was only £3890 and an Omega Seamaster was only £1860 UK Sterling!!!

Man, I got into this watch game far far too late in life!!

Swiss Mad! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 November 2018, 12:46 PM   #56
conti02
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Rome
Posts: 18
Submariner vs. Seamaster Comparison

Very nice review
conti02 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

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.