The Planet Ocean GTM GoodPlanet is in (but not incoming)

[psv]

I really like Omega's affiliation with GoodPlanet so I was pretty happy when I got the call that the new Planet Ocean GMT was in. I currently don't have a GMT in the line-up so I had high expectations on this watch, specially after seeing Ruckdee's excellent photos and review.

The PO-GMT GP package is beautiful with a big bamboo box. My first impressions was: wow, this is a solid piece. 43.5mm and more than 17mm thick (probably 17.25 or 17.5) and it is heavy. I don't have the exact weight but at least 200 grams, which puts it exactly in the same class as the Rolex Deepsea. Unfortunately, I find that problematic because as much as I adore the DSSD I think it is top-heavy and quite often uncomfortable to wear. The PO-GMT is in the same superweight-class but lacks the adjustable clasp, which is a life-saver on the DSSD. This might not be a big minus for many or most people, it is just that I don't need another DSSD, which I often have to take off my wrist when working at the computer, or in bed etc. ~44mm is definitely doable as a daily wearer for me, but it is on the big side, 40-42mm is still a better class for me.



Another reason I went to check out the PO-GMT was that I wanted to compare and contrast it to the 42mm Planet Oceam in titanium, which is also on my short list. For my wrist and taste, I find the POti to be a better fit and a better suited everday wearer sport watch. The GMT is definitely a bit more special and has more wrist-presence.

Both models shares a crucial problem - the black datewheel really doesn't match well with the blue dial/bezel. I know this is nit-picking, and the lighting condition at a watch boutique really doesn't help matters, but it is rather irritating and unattractive. A date-wheel in a match blue hue would have been much better. The other main issue is the thickness. I think a 42mm without the HE valve and no display back, and perhaps 13-14mm thickness would be an aboslute killer (and Rolex killer) watch.

So which one did I end up buying? Turns out neither. I'm not looking for a weekend/special occasion watch but rather a good daily beater that will go with everything, and I know this is a highly personal preference, but I just don't dig blue face watches in real life.



Here it is against the Belstaff jacket I was wearing today (unusually cold and windy day here in DC) and it just doesn't work for me. Blue just doesn't work with everything/everyday like a black or even white dial.

Net/net: I think think the Omega Planet Ocean GMT will be a big hit and it oozes quality, much like a similar Rolex in this price range. I really wish they would offer the POti in the regular matte black dial/bezel and I would have pulled out the Amex right then and there, but again, that is just a personal prefernce, not a complain on Omega.

[SaddleSC]

I totally agree with you...if they offered the 42mm PO 8500 in Ti with a matte black dial, I would be a buyer in a heartbeat.

The blue is not as versatile, the date wheel does not match and I much prefer matte dials to glossy. I currently own a black dial PO 8500 in 42mm, but much like you (with no micro-adjustments on the clasp) find it to be quite a handful on warmer days. It tends to wear top-heavy. The Titanium would be sublime with a black dial.

Thanks for the review!

[MP5]

Im sad to hear. I was saving pennies for the GMT with the hope the thickness wouldnt be absurd. Im not a small guy but the DSSD while my absolute favorite modern Rolex is just a no go due to thickness. Even with the ultimate mitigator in the glidelock. A GMT just plain shouldnt be so thick or require you to be a Shaq to wear it. I am sad but will still go in when the AD calls.

When is Omega going to learn? These arent SEs or specialty watches with similar alternatives like the DSSD and even the smaller POs are 16.3mm thick or a mm+ thicker than a SD! Jeeze

[sager]

Thanks for the review.

Is it the picture or is the blue on the GMT a little more vibrant?

[jmsrolls]

Got to try the GP GMT at the ATL GTG and as with most of the new Omega models, the thick case was a deal killer for me. I'll be keeping my 216570 EXPII - the perfect size and fit.

I discussed this issue with our guest speaker, Charles Laevens, Omega's National Trainer and Sales Manager. He stated that Omega's new movements require the thicker cases but noted that watches at Basel 2013 indicated a trend toward smaller, thinner watches. He thought it was something product development needs to address.

[crew]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

I discussed this issue with our guest speaker, Charles Laevens, Omega's National Trainer and Sales Manager. He stated that Omega's new movements require the thicker cases but noted that watches at Basel 2013 indicated a trend toward smaller, thinner watches. He thought it was something product development needs to address.

Interesting comment and somewhat of an unusual acknowledgement on his part. It's refreshing to hear an executive speak with such candor.

[Survivor]

The blue and orange alone would keep me away from both watches and in the case of the PO LM, the titanium is a deal breaker regardless of the color combo.

[T. Ferguson]

So, is the bezel really unidirectional?

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

So, is the bezel really unidirectional?

Yes.

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Yes.

Deal breaker - shut it down.

[improviz]

I agree with OP: the > 17" height is a real issue for me; I'll try one on as I think it's gorgeous but when I tried on one of the AT GMT Chronographs some time back it was the same deal...plus I really really wish Omega would get with the program and introduce *some* sort of fine adjustment on their clasps, it is *really* a PITA to have to deal with it either being too floppy or constricting blood flow. It's simply impossible for me to get a proper fit when the finest adjustment available is 1/2 link. I love the bracelet and the simplicity of opening the clasp, but surely there must be some way to add a microadjustment capability.

I also like it better in black.

[WJGESQ]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Yes.

Why on earth would it be made that way?

[Dream99]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Yes.

No you are wrong.....its Bi directional. See Omega web site.

[psv]

Yes, the bezel in bidirectional.

The rant wasn't a review as much as some early impressions. I'm trying to stay positive, but it really is a missed opportunity from Omega.

[cedargrove]

Originally Posted by Survivor

?.. the titanium is a deal breaker regardless of the color combo.

Because it's more expensive?

In my opinion it's worth the price for Omega's grade 5 titanium. Not only is it lighter (a big plus on these larger watches), but it's also significantly more scratch resistant than steel, and corrosion resistant to salt water (316l steel is not) which is a plus on a diver. Finally it is a slightly darker shade than the steel, which in my opinion is nicer.

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by Dream99

No you are wrong.....its Bi directional. See Omega web site.

Originally Posted by psv

Yes, the bezel in bidirectional...

That obviously makes much more sense. Their website was originally the reference for where it was first mentioned in TRF to be uni-directional. Someone noticed the error and they corrected it.

http://rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=290624

Glad it was only a mistake on their web page rather than in the design of the watch.

[Survivor]

Originally Posted by cedargrove

Because it's more expensive?

In my opinion it's worth the price for Omega's grade 5 titanium. Not only is it lighter (a big plus on these larger watches), but it's also significantly more scratch resistant than steel, and corrosion resistant to salt water (316l steel is not) which is a plus on a diver. Finally it is a slightly darker shade than the steel, which in my opinion is nicer.

Would never pay more for titanium on a watch, whether its more expensive to make or not. Lighter weight, not a plus for me.....darker shade, not all that attractive.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree At the end of the day, I'm a SS guy when it comes to sport watches.

[cedargrove]

Originally Posted by Survivor

Would never pay more for titanium on a watch, whether its more expensive to make or not. Lighter weight, not a plus for me.....darker shade, not all that attractive.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree At the end of the day, I'm a SS guy when it comes to sport watches.

Cool. Was just curious why. A lot of people have a misconception of grade 5 titanium.

[psv]

Originally Posted by Survivor

Would never pay more for titanium on a watch, whether its more expensive to make or not. Lighter weight, not a plus for me.....darker shade, not all that attractive.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree At the end of the day, I'm a SS guy when it comes to sport watches.

The way Omega does and treats their grade 5 titanium, it is not much darker at all - not at all as dull as e.g. Breitling's or even JLC's ti. And I'm the opposite, I don't want my watch to have too much heft, rarely ovder 160 gram and 215 like the DSSD or the PO-GMT is simply too much. Horses for courses, of course.

[cedargrove]

Originally Posted by Dream99

No you are wrong.....its Bi directional. See Omega web site.

I checked one out today. Definitely bi-directional, which we'd expect on a GMT.

But 120 clicks? That I didn't expect.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Dream99

No you are wrong.....its Bi directional. See Omega web site.

Doh!
What an idiot. Somehow I read one thing but understood another. I even tried this watch on, Yes the bezel is Bi-Directional.
Glad you guys straightened me out and clarified that for everyone.

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Doh!
What an idiot. Somehow I read one thing but understood another. I even tried this watch on, Yes the bezel is Bi-Directional.
Glad you guys straightened me out and clarified that for everyone.

You're not crazy Rashid. When the first thread started about this watch there was a link to the Omega website and it indeed said it was uni-directional. Apparently they noticed the mistake and corrected it on the website.