OMG -- Omega 300 Master Co-Axel

[wantonebad]

Originally Posted by azguy

I'm still waiting to see one in the flesh/steel so to speak.

The PCLs (I dislike PCLs in general) look bad from the pics, not sure I like what appears to be a larger than normal winding crown, no wrist shots Marc..

It looked goofy on my wrist with the extra links, made no sense to try and balance it while messing with my phone. If it had a brushed bracelet and no faux patina I would have walked out of the store with it that day. I didn't like the longer than normal lugs but that's not a deal breaker. The Boutique in Natick has had it for two weeks and no sales. They still have the first model they sent me an e-mail on. Kind of surprising...

[broncophil]

Not my pic, but loving the 2 tone

[Cuts33]

Originally Posted by wantonebad

If it had a brushed bracelet and no faux patina I would have walked out of the store with it that day.

I agree.

I essentially would like to see the current PO dial, including the date, in this case with a brushed bracelet.

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by Cuts33

I agree.

I essentially would like to see the current PO dial, including the date, in this case with a brushed bracelet.

So you want a Planet Ocean in a different shaped case That wouldn't be a new watch, just a new Planet Ocean, it wouldn't really take Omega anywhere much. Don't you think this is a better looking watch than a PO?

[Cuts33]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

Don't you think this is a better looking watch than a PO?

Nope.

The PO 8500 is one of the best looking dive watches out there IMO. The case dimensions mostly due the sapphire case back leave something to be desired. The lack of a micro adjustable clasp is also a big miss.

I'd personally like to see more of a streamlined approach where there is a 300m version of the PO (in terms of similar design) which would be Omega's competitor to the Sub and the 600m version would be Omega's DSSD.

The best things about the Seamaster 300 are the size and the clasp.

The PCLs are ridiculous for a dive watch. I am indifferent on the vintage line issue but think there should at least be an applied logo.

I'd also like to see a date version.

[Cuts33]

Double post.

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by Cuts33

Nope.

The PO 8500 is one of the best looking dive watches out there IMO. The case dimensions mostly due the sapphire case back leave something to be desired. The lack of a micro adjustable clasp is also a big miss.

I'd personally like to see more of a streamlined approach where there is a 300m version of the PO (in terms of similar design) which would be Omega's competitor to the Sub and the 600m version would be Omega's DSSD.

The best things about the Seamaster 300 are the size and the clasp.

The PCLs are ridiculous for a dive watch. I am indifferent on the vintage line issue but think there should at least be an applied logo.

I'd also like to see a date version.

Fair enough. The clasp on the new watch is pretty bad but it is not the watch itself. The PCL's are a strange choice but this is not a dive watch, just look at the gold and titanium options. It is a pure fashion watch that you can dive with.

[rmccullough21]

I received mine about two weeks ago. I had thought about brushing the center links, but so far I haven't had an issue with them and have gotten nothing but compliments on this piece. I love it and can't seem to wear anything else! This was a birthday gift from my wife (and myself for picking it out months ago haha) and the perfect milestone (30) present I could ever imagine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AlTinkster92]

I went to Finks in Charlotte NC yesterday, Rolex, Omega and Cartier all under one roof. That Seamaster was beautiful however not my cup of tea so to speak. Finks is a great place, all very professional and would not hesitate to purchase from them. I was like a kid in a candy store looking around! Al

[superdog]

Went back to the boutique to pick up a strap they ordered for me.

The same one I tried on, their original, was still there. It's apparwvtly been in about 3 weeks.

I'm genuinely surprised it hasn't sold yet.

[AlTinkster92]

Will take pics when my SMP comes back from service. Finks is great!

[WJGESQ]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

for me, the two best looking in the range are the full RG/black insert & dial and the TT Ti/RG/blue insert & dial:

Why is this a better watch than the PO series?

[Bobby T]

Originally Posted by WJGESQ

Why is this a better watch than the PO series?

Its not..........

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Bobby T

Its not..........

It is better in it's movement materials. This watch is completely anti-magnetic. It also has less moving parts which can make for a more robust watch. This also has an arguably better material in the liquid metal bezel vs the ceramic in the PO. It also wears smaller/thinner which many prefer.

I would actually argue this is a better "watch" in design, but the PO is the better all arounder with more water proofing, He valve and date.

In the end it's not really a "this watch was made to replace or be better" than the PO. It's just a another watch added, and a reboot at that, of a particularly popular model.

[WJGESQ]

Not sure as to price delta, but I am more of a PO fan, by far.

[jay_man2]

I was at an Omega Boutique today and saw this piece in stainless, titanium, and the two-tone gold. It looks better in pictures than it did on my wrist.

[Il-Re]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

Looked at two of these watches in the flesh today. Not so sure that they totally impress. SS black dial and the Titanium blue dial. The case is thick and they sit high off the wrist and the sapphire crystal back reveals a movement that is not really beautiful to look at. The dials look better in photos than in real life where I felt they were somewhat flat. Omega uses an inferior grade of steel to Rolex so given that SS model is the same price as the no date Sub but without the real pedigree to justify it and it is double the price of the Tudor Black Bay (which uses a similar grade steel to the Omega), I'm not so sure that this is a winner for value. Still it is a lovely watch but I was just left a little cold and not hankering to own one.

Agree to an extent, If the price is the same as a Sub no date, I would go for a Sub without question.

[NoVaSubowner]

Originally Posted by Il-Re

Agree to an extent, If the price is the same as a Sub no date, I would go for a Sub without question.

Lets not forget that these can probably be had, or will be shortly, at a discount if you know where to look; which may make it a better buy then a ND Sub-C.

[warrior]

Saw the Blue Titanium at an Omega Boutique. This is a pretty interesting piece. It's NOT what your typical "tool watch" watch forum guy will be seeking...in the sense that it's dressy with the PCLs and the hour markers aren't huge in your face. Overall, pretty subtle for a diver. But, that's what I like about it! It's a relatively dressy diver with the added uniqueness of the orange contrasting with the blue.

It's also extremely comfortable and light due to the titanium. I had an older Planet Ocean ( 2500 movement with the thinner case as opposed to the new 8500 PO) and this actually wears thinner than the old PO, even though the thickness specs are about the same. IMO, it's a watch for those that want a dressy diver that's not too "tool" (i.e. a diver with large markers and brushed bracelet). The dial is a matte subdued blue...not as sparkly/shiny as the new Titanium Blue Speedy Coaxial, which is stunning in a different way.

[Eccentric]

Hi! As a member of this forum I am not new, but this is my first post.

I know that this thread isn’t about the OMEGA Seamaster 300 master co-axial VS the ROLEX Sub C, but I am torn between the two timepieces since I am planning on buying one of them in the near future and would like to share my thoughts with you guys. I have read reviews, forum posts, tried on both watches, spoken to various AD’s and of course thought a lot about it myself which has boiled down to those thoughts.

Rolex Submariner

Brand:

Rolex has more prestige to the brand and is overall the stronger brand
(at least in the average Joes eyes).

Design:

Is timeless and more conservatively designed, is the “original” divers watch and it appears by its ascetics to be a bit more rugged and toolish.

Quality:

Has excellent finish, durability, quality in materials and excellent fit.

Progressiveness:

Is conservative in terms of size and design, has had the same type of movement since the 80s, but the newer ones is off course updated.

Icon status:

Is a truly icon

Omega Seamaster 300

Brand:

Has gained their prestige in recent years and is considered as a high end luxury watch brand.

Design:

Timeless/classic with modern elements/expressions, I consider it to be more of a jewelryish type of watch than a rugged toolish watch.

Quality:

Has excellent finish, durability, quality in materials and excellent fit.

Progressiveness:

Has interesting technology and is more advanced from a technological perspective.

Icon status:

Is a classic, but its legacy is unknown to the masses

My personal conclusion

For me it all comes down to two things, the brand VS the technology. Rolex has the most prestigious brand and Omega has the more interesting and advanced technology. I find these two timepieces extremely beautiful. As I mentioned earlier I have tried both of them, but I find the Omega very hard to capture on photo so I wouldn’t post any here. It just looks a lot better in real life, for example the lume isn’t as yellow as it appears in photos it’s more white/yellow.
What do you all think of this debate?

All the best!
/C

[warrior]

Welcome to the forum! I would agree that brand awareness goes to Rolex. There is no doubt.

I also think you're correct that the 8500 movement is more advanced and, in "most instances" and generally speaking, keeps better time. ( I've had many Rolexes and Omegas and if you search the internet, the 8500 movement owners trumpet the incredible accuracy. Of course, every watch is different )

In the end, they are both very high quality. I think you have to determine what's most important to YOU. For me, at THIS LEVEL, looks are most important. I try not to let "brand prestige" influence how I think a watch looks--especially when both watches are high quality and have their pros and cons.

Which one do you like better in terms of looks? That's the one you should get. Good luck with your choice!

Originally Posted by Eccentric

Hi! As a member of this forum I am not new, but this is my first post.

I know that this thread isn’t about the OMEGA Seamaster 300 master co-axial VS the ROLEX Sub C, but I am torn between the two timepieces since I am planning on buying one of them in the near future and would like to share my thoughts with you guys. I have read reviews, forum posts, tried on both watches, spoken to various AD’s and of course thought a lot about it myself which has boiled down to those thoughts.

Rolex Submariner

Brand:

Rolex has more prestige to the brand and is overall the stronger brand
(at least in the average Joes eyes).

Design:

Is timeless and more conservatively designed, is the “original” divers watch and it appears by its ascetics to be a bit more rugged and toolish.

Quality:

Has excellent finish, durability, quality in materials and excellent fit.

Progressiveness:

Is conservative in terms of size and design, has had the same type of movement since the 80s, but the newer ones is off course updated.

Icon status:

Is a truly icon

Omega Seamaster 300

Brand:

Has gained their prestige in recent years and is considered as a high end luxury watch brand.

Design:

Timeless/classic with modern elements/expressions, I consider it to be more of a jewelryish type of watch than a rugged toolish watch.

Quality:

Has excellent finish, durability, quality in materials and excellent fit.

Progressiveness:

Has interesting technology and is more advanced from a technological perspective.

Icon status:

Is a classic, but its legacy is unknown to the masses

My personal conclusion

For me it all comes down to two things, the brand VS the technology. Rolex has the most prestigious brand and Omega has the more interesting and advanced technology. I find these two timepieces extremely beautiful. As I mentioned earlier I have tried both of them, but I find the Omega very hard to capture on photo so I wouldn’t post any here. It just looks a lot better in real life, for example the lume isn’t as yellow as it appears in photos it’s more white/yellow.
What do you all think of this debate?

All the best!
/C

[Choo Yao Chuen]

Design wise, I'd go for Omega.
Quality, reliability, re-sale value, prestige, I go for Rolex

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by warrior

Welcome to the forum! I would agree that brand awareness goes to Rolex. There is no doubt.

I also think you're correct that the 8500 movement is more advanced and, in "most instances" and generally speaking, keeps better time. ( I've had many Rolexes and Omegas and if you search the internet, the 8500 movement owners trumpet the incredible accuracy. Of course, every watch is different )

In the end, they are both very high quality. I think you have to determine what's most important to YOU. For me, at THIS LEVEL, looks are most important. I try not to let "brand prestige" influence how I think a watch looks--especially when both watches are high quality and have their pros and cons.

Which one do you like better in terms of looks? That's the one you should get. Good luck with your choice!

Very good points. I think aesthetics are very important. I think in that context the Seamaster is the better looking watch by a very narrow margin. Having tried both on, the Sub is more comfy.

Originally Posted by Choo Yao Chuen

Design wise, I'd go for Omega.
Quality, reliability, re-sale value, prestige, I go for Rolex

I'd argue that quality and reliability wise both are equal. The Rolex wins the other categories.

[courboy]

Really tempted by the steel one of these. Is it too similar to my 214270 explorer though? It would be my second decent watch.

[tegee26]

FWIW.....I saw the new SM 300 in the Omega Boutique in Vegas last week. It was down to the PO 42mm and the newer SM 300. Tried on the SM300 and with the longer lugs on the case it really didn't sit right on my wrist, sorta rocked back 'n' forth....very strange.

If with the thicker case of the PO 600M it just sat better on the wrist. I was bummed because I really want to get the newer version of the SM300, but the lug design (for my wrist) was a deal breaker.

[mps354]

I just tried one on in person. Before going to the boutique, I thought the polished center links on the bracelet would ruin the watch for me, but I found the bracelet to be pretty attractive. However, the thickness of the case ruined it for me...sits very high on the wrist.

[soundserious]

Awesome watch, much more compelling than some of Rolex's current offerings.

[WJGESQ]

With the success of the PO series, what is the point of reissuing the Seamaster?


Is there any advantage to a Seamaster over the POs?


Yeah, I asked this above but was hoping someone could explain this.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by WJGESQ

With the success of the PO series, what is the point of reissuing the Seamaster?


Is there any advantage to a Seamaster over the POs?


Yeah, I asked this above but was hoping someone could explain this.

See post 104.
Besides it isn't about better or replacing. It's just another watch, another choice. Choices are good and so is this watch. I like that it doesn't have an He valve though, cleaner profile.

As far as the point of reissuing the watch.....a lot of folks out there like the older Seamaster so now they can have it in a modern more reliable package. Omega didn't have a basic no date diver in it's line up, something many more people wanted, the Seamaster provided a good platform for that and for the new movement.

[FTX I]

A trusted seller in Amsterdam already offering one.

http://www.jkwatchstore.nl/store.php?wid=1011&offset=1