Omega durability

[trustme707]

Hi Everyone,

I'm quite new to the forum and sorry if that question was already raised earlier. I'm thinking of buying SMP 300 black on a rubber strap and I wanted to ask about durability of the watch - is it the same level as rolex (I own one)?

Also, I travel a lot to the places where temperature sometimes reaches -40C, will that be a problem? "Survivability wise", is Omega same level as Rolex?

[Xenophon]

Having owned both Omega and Rolex I would say that Omega steel is just as robust and durable. The rubber strap will obviously not be as sturdy as a stell bracelet though.

[brandrea]

Welcome to the forum. They are every bit as durable.

As to your temperature question … unless you plan on wearing it over your coat sleeve, the watch will be roughly the same temperature as your body

[cuppa_watch]

Rolex is best at marketing. Omega passed NASA's strict tests and went to the moon while Rolex failed. You should be asking the question the other way around.

[trustme707]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Having owned both Omega and Rolex I would say that Omega steel is just as robust and durable. The rubber strap will obviously not be as sturdy as a stell bracelet though.

I've heard that it must be changed every N years, but I didn't like the steel bracelet when I was checking it in the AD. Plus reviews on the steel bracelet are mostly negative.

[trustme707]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Welcome to the forum. They are every bit as durable.

As to your temperature question … unless you plan on wearing it over your coat sleeve, the watch will be roughly the same temperature as your body

Thank you! Did't actually consider that :-) I was wondering, if this is a dive watch, it should operate in pretty cold temperatures

[trustme707]

Originally Posted by cuppa_watch

Rolex is best at marketing. Omega passed NASA's strict tests and went to the moon while Rolex failed. You should be asking the question the other way around.

But that was when? like many years ago so things might have changed, right?

[Tools]

Originally Posted by trustme707

But that was when? like many years ago so things might have changed, right?

Yes. Comparisons by citing a 60 year old government selection process to any actual durability/accuracy is nonsense. That comparison wasn't even between the watches you are looking at.

Omega is a durable watch and has millions of contended users, as does Rolex. An Omega Seamaster can be had at a better price point than a Rolex Sub, so that always needs to be part of any equation.

[cuppa_watch]

Originally Posted by Tools

Yes. Comparisons by citing a 60 year old government selection process to any actual durability/accuracy is nonsense. That comparison wasn't even between the watches you are looking at.

NASA's test procedure was well documented. This "government selection process" successfully sent humans to the moon. Which would be more nonsense, that government selection process, or the statements from the marketing materials from watch brands?

I admit that my message read a bit like trolling, and you are absolutely right though it wasn't about SMP. But OP didn't specific which Rolex model he had in his minds either.

My point is more about the general durability of modern watches. Since watches from 60 years ago could pass those tests, modern watches should in general be even better. If we want to discuss the durability of specific models, at least we'd need to know the movement, since it is well known that early co-axial had some issues. And later models pass METAS certification. I think very roughly in general, the later the movement, the better.

[Tqmb79]

Omegas in general are built like tanks. Especially the modern ones.

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by trustme707

But that was when? like many years ago so things might have changed, right?

I understood the big plus for the Speedmaster was it being a manual wind. As there is no gravity in space the (potential) lacking movement by the rotor in an automatic watch was a major strike against Rolex.

[usmc_k9_vet]

I would say a current version Seamaster Diver 300 should be fine. I’ve got one on a rubber strap and have put it through quite a bit. Lots of fly fishing in nasty weather. I’ve never had it in -40C, but as another member mentioned, as long as it’s covered up, as I imagine it would be in those conditions, I’d think it should be fine.

I’ve also got a current model Sub and I wouldn’t say one is more or less robust and durable than the other. They’re both great watches that would both likely do fine in the conditions you specify. Only thing I can possibly think of is the oils in the watch changing at temperatures that cold. Someone with more knowledge regarding that matter would need to chime in though.

Edit to add: I also prefer mine on rubber strap with pin buckle. I think it’s the configuration that allows for the least points of failure. While the deployant clasp is nice, as is the steel bracelet and clasp, I have seen multiple people mention the steel bracelet clasp as a point of failure. I’ve seen owners post about the double push button getting stuck, failing, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeAZ]

I dropped a Blue SMP300 from standing height onto a hardwood floor. Fumbled with it and lost my grip, was on the rubber bracelet. I am certain the case took most of the impact (from what I saw and how it landed), and it produced a resounding audible "clunk". I was quite pleased that there was literally no visible trace of any damage to the watch. Case, bezel, crystal, all quite bullet-proof. It ran perfectly afterwards, without a hitch. 10/10 in terms of durability.

I have a feeling that dropping a Rolex would probably result in at least a scuff on the case or bracelet.

[Alex_TA]

Rubber strap doesn’t go well with very cold temperatures.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

I understood the big plus for the Speedmaster was it being a manual wind. As there is no gravity in space the (potential) lacking movement by the rotor in an automatic watch was a major strike against Rolex.

Actually there is no impediment with regard to Rolex as the list of requirements included the ability to manual wind the watch
The Rolex that was submitted for testing by NASA was a manual wind but it ultimately failed to make the grade

[mailman]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

I understood the big plus for the Speedmaster was it being a manual wind. As there is no gravity in space the (potential) lacking movement by the rotor in an automatic watch was a major strike against Rolex.

The Hesalite crystal was a big plus for them also. It will crack under stress and stay in place. Sapphire will shatter and float around inside the rocket.

[trustme707]

Thank you everyone!