Rolex vs Omega

[skyman51]

I have owned many Rolex watches over the last 40 years and currently have three. I will always own and wear a Rolex. I was offered and took an Omega Seamster Professional "James Bond" I hate to say it but here are my observations. It is a great looking watch with an ornate embossed logo on the back cover making faking one very difficult. It keeps perfect time and is a certified chronometer. Finally it is the best and most comfortable bracelet I have ever worn, and the clasp mechanism is better quality and design than any Rolex I have had including the new clasp. I am sure Omega has a patent on it. It is the mechanical not quartz watch and it too is pressure tested to 330m/1000ft. If you don't need the ego boost of wearing the Rolex Sub or GMT or Daytona, this is a great watch at a great price.

[capote]

It doesn't have to be either/or when it comes to Rolex and Omega. Both companies makes very good watches. I have a Rolex but I would like to add an Omega down the line as well.

[azguy]

Been saying that for years, the omega clasp is the best IMHO, I love SMP's

easy to wear, steathly, great bracelet and more afforable than crazy Rolex MSRP's

[skyman51]

Originally Posted by azguy

Been saying that for years, the omega clasp is the best IMHO, I love SMP's

easy to wear, steathly, great bracelet and more afforable than crazy Rolex MSRP's

Forget the MSRP which is great, I bought this watch as a complete set used. It is a 2004 model. I paid $1200.00 for it and I can't tell it from new, except for minor scratching on the clasp from resting and moving it on a desk top. It has been Omega serviced less than a year ago.

[1watchaholic]

I fall into the camp of why not both!! I have 2 Rolex's and 4 Omega's and love them all. They are worn for different occasions, functions etc. Mercedes or BMW?? Why not both...

[azguy]

work of art

[AlbyCrowned]

Originally Posted by azguy

Been saying that for years, the omega clasp is the best IMHO, I love SMP's

easy to wear, steathly, great bracelet and more afforable than crazy Rolex MSRP's

Sorry but the new Rolex clasps are the best out there! Hands down!

[Sherwooddavid]

Originally Posted by capote

It doesn't have to be either/or when it comes to Rolex and Omega. Both companies makes very good watches. I have a Rolex but I would like to add an Omega down the line as well.

My next purchase will be an Omega Speedmaster 3573.50.

[Rollme]

Originally Posted by Sherwooddavid

My next purchase will be an Omega Speedmaster 3573.50.

Careful..i wanted a 3573.50 with the sapphire case back and the pushers were very loose..was told that after i purchase the watch the pushers would have to be screwed in tight by taking the case back off and movement removed,they are screwed in from the inside.

[capote]

Originally Posted by zion_rasta

Now, remember the next time you are in a meeting and the rolexes are flashing around the table and you are hiding the omega... it may subcounciously impact your self confidence....

Are you serious? What do you do if somebody has a Patek?

Originally Posted by Rollme

Careful..i wanted a 3573.50 with the sapphire case back and the pushers were very loose..was told that after i purchase the watch the pushers would have to be screwed in tight by taking the case back off and movement removed,they are screwed in from the inside.

Oh yeah I remember you. Omega watches have fake pushers. You were going to buy a "bluesy subby-wobby" if I remember correctly.

[Rollme]

Originally Posted by capote

Are you serious? What do you do if somebody has a Patek?



Oh yeah I remember you. Omega watches have fake pushers. You were going to buy a "bluesy subby-wobby" if I remember correctly.

No no,,,locks,they have fake locks for the pushers.

[zion_rasta]

[QUOTE=capote;3478781]Are you serious? What do you do if somebody has a Patek?

Rolex gets all the praises, Patek, you almost have to give them a lecture to explain why the fossil looking watch is better than anything else and it costs more than a car...

[The GMT Master]

The one thing making the deciding difference in the past was the fact that Rolex had a true in-house movement, whilst Omega didn't. Now Omega do have their own in-house movements (the cal. 8500 basic time and date movement and the cal. 9300 chronograph movement), it's becoming harder and harder to justify getting a Rolex over the equivalent Omega. The cal. 8500 is such a big step up in terms of finishing, performance, power reserve and service intervals, it makes the cal. 3135 look terribly dated.

There are some watches where Rolex are still in a league of their own (GMT, Explorer II, Sky-Dweller, YM II), but for pretty much every other model, Omega has a better priced, equally (or more) capable option. Sure, Omega has a legacy of some pretty terrible watches in the 80s and 90s to get off its back (which has done a lot of damage to its reputation), but if you look at the product it is making right now, it is rapidly becoming a market leader. Rolex hasn't had a serious like-for-like competitor since the 70s - things have changed, and Omega is there to take some market share

[Rollme]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

The one thing making the deciding difference in the past was the fact that Rolex had a true in-house movement, whilst Omega didn't. Now Omega do have their own in-house movements (the cal. 8500 basic time and date movement and the cal. 9300 chronograph movement), it's becoming harder and harder to justify getting a Rolex over the equivalent Omega. The cal. 8500 is such a big step up in terms of finishing, performance, power reserve and service intervals, it makes the cal. 3135 look terribly dated.

Ahhh BS!We'll see in about 5 years how these supposedly longer service movements work out,my bet is there will be lots of problems like there always are with omega.The guy ran around trying to convince watch makers to buy his escapement,believe me he went to rolex first.
You know what GMT Master?.....I'm going out to buy another Rolex with the superior 3135 movement..you continue convincing me to buy more!

[mannyv11]

Originally Posted by Rollme

Ahhh BS!The guy ran around trying to convince watch makers to buy his escapement,believe me he went to rolex first.
You know what GMT Master?.....I'm going out to buy another Rolex with the superior 3135 movement..you continue convincing me to buy more!

Congrats?

[ttomczak]

Originally Posted by Rollme

Ahhh BS!We'll see in about 5 years how these supposedly longer service movements work out,my bet is there will be lots of problems like there always are with omega.The guy ran around trying to convince watch makers to buy his escapement,believe me he went to rolex first.
You know what GMT Master?.....I'm going out to buy another Rolex with the superior 3135 movement..you continue convincing me to buy more!

While not a "true" inhouse movement, the 2500 has been used since 1999... And there are few if any real problems... Seems like you have had bad experiences with Omega... Shame... But both brands have had problems occasionally... (see the thread on the guy who had to send his DSSD back after 13 days)...

I vote with my pocketbook as they both have a place on my wrist...

Thanks!

[ndsleep612]

Originally Posted by Rollme

Ahhh BS!We'll see in about 5 years how these supposedly longer service movements work out,my bet is there will be lots of problems like there always are with omega.The guy ran around trying to convince watch makers to buy his escapement,believe me he went to rolex first.
You know what GMT Master?.....I'm going out to buy another Rolex with the superior 3135 movement..you continue convincing me to buy more!

George Daniels wore a Rolex datejust himself. If the inventor of the co-axial escapement wears a Rolex himself, how can omega convince their consumers that its superior?

[Rollme]

Originally Posted by ndsleep612

George Daniels wore a Rolex datejust himself. If the inventor of the co-axial escapement wears a Rolex himself, how can omega convince their consumers that its superior?

Yeah that's the guy who ran around getting tossed out the door by watch companies.
Omega had to do something cuz all the eta movements that they improved were horrible..they should have left them alone.

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by Rollme

Ahhh BS!We'll see in about 5 years how these supposedly longer service movements work out,my bet is there will be lots of problems like there always are with omega.The guy ran around trying to convince watch makers to buy his escapement,believe me he went to rolex first.
You know what GMT Master?.....I'm going out to buy another Rolex with the superior 3135 movement..you continue convincing me to buy more!

You're free to do whatever you want with your money. I've yet to see you make a convincing counter-argument - the cal. 8500 has been remarkably problem free, I can count on one hand the number of issues I've seen personally (having worked at an AD dealing with both Rolex and Omega) and been reported online. The dealership I worked for didn't have a single cal. 8500 based watch come back with movement issues, which, considering the movement has been around since 2008, is very impressive indeed. I think I'll be the one telling you 'I told you so' in a few years' time

[Rollme]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

The dealership I worked for didn't have a single cal. 8500 based watch come back with movement issues, which, considering the movement has been around since 2008, is very impressive indeed. I think I'll be the one telling you 'I told you so' in a few years' time

You can't tell me anything,,the 3135 has a long history and is getting better and stronger year after year and is superior..you'll see in a few years time..these new watches will be stopping after 5-6 years for the simple fact that the other parts still need upkeep and oil and it's not all about the escapememnt,you''ll see.

[esm]

Originally Posted by Rollme

You can't tell me anything,,

funny that's the exact same vibe/feeling I got from your posts

[karmatp]

Rollme, I see you are back with you silly comments.

There are so many people brain washed by the Rolex brand in this world it is sad. So many guys wear the name on the dial, not the watch, it is pathetic actually.

Rollme, if you stick around you might get educated on watches and learn that there are actually many great watch brands, and yes, many way better than your mass produced, assembly line GMT.

[Silvio Mosiello]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

The one thing making the deciding difference in the past was the fact that Rolex had a true in-house movement, whilst Omega didn't. Now Omega do have their own in-house movements (the cal. 8500 basic time and date movement and the cal. 9300 chronograph movement), it's becoming harder and harder to justify getting a Rolex over the equivalent Omega. The cal. 8500 is such a big step up in terms of finishing, performance, power reserve and service intervals, it makes the cal. 3135 look terribly dated.

There are some watches where Rolex are still in a league of their own (GMT, Explorer II, Sky-Dweller, YM II), but for pretty much every other model, Omega has a better priced, equally (or more) capable option. Sure, Omega has a legacy of some pretty terrible watches in the 80s and 90s to get off its back (which has done a lot of damage to its reputation), but if you look at the product it is making right now, it is rapidly becoming a market leader. Rolex hasn't had a serious like-for-like competitor since the 70s - things have changed, and Omega is there to take some market share

Well said Chris!

[versatile1]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

The one thing making the deciding difference in the past was the fact that Rolex had a true in-house movement, whilst Omega didn't. Now Omega do have their own in-house movements (the cal. 8500 basic time and date movement and the cal. 9300 chronograph movement), it's becoming harder and harder to justify getting a Rolex over the equivalent Omega. The cal. 8500 is such a big step up in terms of finishing, performance, power reserve and service intervals, it makes the cal. 3135 look terribly dated.

There are some watches where Rolex are still in a league of their own (GMT, Explorer II, Sky-Dweller, YM II), but for pretty much every other model, Omega has a better priced, equally (or more) capable option. Sure, Omega has a legacy of some pretty terrible watches in the 80s and 90s to get off its back (which has done a lot of damage to its reputation), but if you look at the product it is making right now, it is rapidly becoming a market leader. Rolex hasn't had a serious like-for-like competitor since the 70s - things have changed, and Omega is there to take some market share

That new in house movement drives the price way up from what it was though.
My omega planet ocean which was a 3900 watch not to long ago is now 6500.
I can buy a ceramic no date sub for that through the right people

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by versatile1

That new in house movement drives the price way up from what it was though.
My omega planet ocean which was a 3900 watch not to long ago is now 6500.
I can buy a ceramic no date sub for that through the right people

Yes, prices have gone up a lot, but then again, so has Rolex's prices, and they haven't changed anywhere near as comprehensively as Omega. My favourite Rolex (the GMT IIc in steel) has gone up from £3600 to £5500 (ish) since 2008, and no changes have been made to that. The Swiss Franc is a major driving factor in how prices are across the watch industry, so there is more than meets the eye than just the improvements.

For a more direct comparison, the cal. 8500 Planet Ocean retails at £3800 over here, and the Sub Date retails at £5500. You can get a reasonable amount of discount on a Planet Ocean, whereas most ADs will laugh at you if you want discount on a 116610. 15% is achievable from most places on a Planet Ocean, so let's call it £3200 for the PO, and £5200 if you have a good relationship with your AD for the Sub. A £2000 difference between the two watches is huge. Both watches do essentially the same thing. I've written extensive objective comparisons between the watches before, I won't bore everyone by repeating myself again. But, even with their price rises, the Planet Ocean is still a significantly better value watch than the Submariner, and I would go so far to say it is simply the better watch of the two.

If, in twenty years' time, we look back on this again, I think that the 116610 will be seen as a real disappointment, whereas the cal. 8500 Planet Ocean will be seen as the watch that helped Omega to live up to its legacy once again. Many people will disagree, but I think we are at a turning point for these two great brands

Chris

[munshpe]

Makes me want an Omega!

[mannyv11]

I love my 16610 but I'm planning on my next watch to be that beautiful Omega Planet Ocean. Haven't decided which one yet but BOY are they awesome watches. And when you can easily get 25% discount on them from your AD, you really can't go wrong.

[zion_rasta]

No one is going to dispute your comment. Omegas are good...

But like you said, it does not give you the Kung POW! of the Rolex.

If you do not care, then yep... great watch to have.

Now, remember the next time you are in a meeting and the rolexes are flashing around the table and you are hiding the omega... it may subcounciously impact your self confidence....

[Rollme]

Looks like a made in china bracelet..says so on the last engraving at the bottom....china....

[acce1999]

Originally Posted by Rollme

Looks like a made in china bracelet..says so on the last engraving at the bottom....china....

I see that you spent some time photoshopping (or whatever) John's (azguy) photo. May I suggest the use of emoticons if this was meant as a joke.

But perhaps it wasn't.

Best,

A