How Do Rolexes Stack Up Against the Competition

[blown5.0]

In the different manifestations of its offerings? For example-

-Diving use- How does the Sub line stack up against those from Omega or the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms?

-Aviation- Rolex GMT vs the Breitling Navitimer

-Use in heavy magnetic scenarios- Rolex Milgauss vs Omega Aqua Terra

I love the history of mechanical watches in general, and it would be interesting to see how Rolexes fare across a multitude of different scenarios. I am not just talking about the aesthetics, but the actual functionality of the watches.

[Junior_]

Sub beats the Omega Seamaster every day of the week (though the Seamaster is a great watch). Only place the Seamaster 300 comes close to the Sub is antimagnetic.

[MTBer]

Originally Posted by Junior_

Sub beats the Omega Seamaster every day of the week (though the Seamaster is a great watch). Only place the Seamaster 300 comes close to the Sub is antimagnetic.

Out of curiosity, what do you mean “comes close”? Omega has Rolex absolutely beaten in terms of advertised resistance to magnetic fields.

[Junior_]

Originally Posted by MTBer

Out of curiosity, what do you mean “comes close”? Omega has Rolex absolutely beaten in terms of advertised resistance to magnetic fields.

That’s what I meant. Seamaster is better in terms of anti-magnetic, given the silicone balance wheel. This is what makes it come close. But not beat.

[Jrcigar]

Originally Posted by Junior_

That’s what I meant. Seamaster is better in terms of anti-magnetic, given the silicone balance wheel. This is what makes it come close. But not beat.

You think 15 thousand gauss is “close”?

[Junior_]

Originally Posted by Jrcigar

You think 15 thousand gauss is “close”?

No. The Omega is the clear, clear winner in the specific area (anti-magnetism). It is this area that makes the Omega close overall.

But overall the Sub wins.

[101031-28]

Rolex, Rolex and Rolex. Then again, all I know and wear is Rolex

[SoTaxLaw]

Regarding function in “heavy magnetic scenarios” some of the Omega watches offer 15,000 gauss so that is a material advantage for Omega under the conditions the OP describes. I bought a blue Railmaster that offers this feature along with 150M water depth rating. However, the watch wasn’t as comfortable as my Rolex watches so I quickly came to realize that there are other factors that are just as important when selecting a timepiece. Edit: okay I knew that beforehand but I pretended this was a way to save money when looking at the Z Blue Milgauss.

[brandrea]

In real world terms of use, I’d say they are pretty much equal.

I prefer the Rolex brand and it’s aesthetics.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by brandrea

In real world terms of use, I’d say they are pretty much equal.

I prefer the Rolex brand and it’s aesthetics.

I agree it's very personal, I've owned all three and enjoyed them but the Sub is the only one that I have now, altho I really like the new SMP with blue bezel and grey dial, a TT that is pretty unique.

[Kyle3130]

Rolex would probably take the top spot in every category of mechanical watchmaking except finishing.

[Boaters]

I think good and I prefer Rolex.

[georgekart]

It's really hard to judge. What's the best?

For example diving: if best is one with highest depth rating, then Deepsea Challenge takes it. However if we only take commercially available timepieces, Hublot has a watch that can go 4000m (100 more than DSSD) and was tested down to 5000m. Although it looks atrocious.

Aviation is difficult, because many watches tracking multiple time zones exist, but arguably GMT is most useful implementations, however Omega and TAG do have a GMT with chronograph functions so arguably those are more usable.

Magnetic scenarios - Here I would actually argue Omega takes the cake. Rolex has very magnetic resistant movement, cased in magnetic resistant case, whereas Omega takes a new approach. All their new movements are absolutely magnetic proof (at least to my understanding) and while Milgauss was tested to 10000 Gauss and did not suffer consequences at some strength of field it would. Omega wouldn't. Although I suppose if fields are strong enough to affect Milgauss, watch is the last thing you would worry about. You are likely to have your hand flying towards the magnetic field with your watch still working properly.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by georgekart

It's really hard to judge. What's the best?

For example diving: if best is one with highest depth rating, then Deepsea Challenge takes it. However if we only take commercially available timepieces, Hublot has a watch that can go 4000m (100 more than DSSD) and was tested down to 5000m. Although it looks atrocious.

Aviation is difficult, because many watches tracking multiple time zones exist, but arguably GMT is most useful implementations, however Omega and TAG do have a GMT with chronograph functions so arguably those are more usable.

Magnetic scenarios - Here I would actually argue Omega takes the cake. Rolex has very magnetic resistant movement, cased in magnetic resistant case, whereas Omega takes a new approach. All their new movements are absolutely magnetic proof (at least to my understanding) and while Milgauss was tested to 10000 Gauss and did not suffer consequences at some strength of field it would. Omega wouldn't. Although I suppose if fields are strong enough to affect Milgauss, watch is the last thing you would worry about. You are likely to have your hand flying towards the magnetic field with your watch still working properly.

But no matter the brand and how its rated its very doubtful if most all will never be in a environment to test the watches ratings .Take the W/R of high rated dive watches great engineering but man or even superman will never use the depth rating in water.Same for magnetic fields its doubtful if any wearer today would encounter such strong magnet fields.Although great engineering today its basically mine is bigger than yours,and today many do buy the mine is bigger than yours watches.

[jason10mm]

For actual functional performance there is zero difference and they ALL perform miserably compared to a gshock or citizen ecodrive ( possible exception is a spring drive grand seiko). Rolex holds value a bit better, that is all.

[frankfrazetta]

Originally Posted by jason10mm

For actual functional performance there is zero difference and they ALL perform miserably compared to a gshock or citizen ecodrive ( possible exception is a spring drive grand seiko). Rolex holds value a bit better, that is all.

Soooooo . . . WHAT DO YOUR COMMENTS HAVE TO DO WITH MECHANICAL WATCHES?

[jason10mm]

Originally Posted by frankfrazetta

Soooooo . . . WHAT DO YOUR COMMENTS HAVE TO DO WITH MECHANICAL WATCHES?

Simple. Asking which mechanical watch is better is kinda like asking if titanium horseshoes perform better than carbon fiber horseshoes. The entire conversation has been technologically superseded and better much all mechanical watches perform within a reasonable margin of each other, and they are all left in the dust by quartz by any rational measure of performance.

Dont get me wrong, I love my mech watches and I have Rolex and omega. But as a wrist borne timing device they are all beaten by quartz that is powered by light and never needs to be set and has a dozen extra functions.

So this question is really missing the forest for the trees in my opinion.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by jason10mm

Simple. Asking which mechanical watch is better is kinda like asking if titanium horseshoes perform better than carbon fiber horseshoes. The entire conversation has been technologically superseded and better much all mechanical watches perform within a reasonable margin of each other, and they are all left in the dust by quartz by any rational measure of performance.

Dont get me wrong, I love my mech watches and I have Rolex and omega. But as a wrist borne timing device they are all beaten by quartz that is powered by light and never needs to be set and has a dozen extra functions.

So this question is really missing the forest for the trees in my opinion.

i’ve found that a well regulated rolex outperforms some of my analog quartz watches. a high end breitling type cosc thermocompensated quartz is a different conversation but I’m not 100% any citizen will keep better time than any rolex.

[zengineer]

Ask on the Omega Forum, they'll know.

Actually, most of us don't dive deep, pilot jets or work in heavy magnetic scenarios... whatever that is, so go for what looks best and holds value (the Rolex).

[watchmavan]

You're asking this on a ROLEX forum! Seriously?

Although this could be funny to watch the Fanboys come out to play.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mystro]

There is no competition.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Mystro

There is no competition.

[bp1000]

They pretty much do take the crown (no pun intended) in virtually all diver related categories.

Nothing really comes close, although they have moved from tool to overengineered in the last 8 years.

It’s hard to find a better GMT or explorer too.

Step into the dress arena and complications/grand complications and all you have to ask yourself is have you ever seen a Cellini posted on the WRUW threads?

Lange, PP and JLC have that covered.

Contenous issue, but omega do better chronographs. Rolex’s refusal to covert the past is damanaging what their Daytona could be. They are trying too hard to be different yet they had it with their 6263.

The speedmaster is still classic because it stays true to itself and wether or not you enjoy the LEs they give you variety. The CK and trillogy broadarrow both being affordable with vintage design and the perfect 39.4mm size.

[Finslayer83]

Seiko and Omega have better lume.

Hard to argue otherwise

[watchwatcher]

Rolex makes great watches...and so do several other manufacturers.

How do does Rolex stack up to the others? Very favorably, I think.

[blown5.0]

I realize I would get some bias on a Rolex forum, but I guess the reality is most are pretty capable. It's just a question of how well the company crafts their narrative.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by blown5.0

I realize I would get some bias on a Rolex forum, but I guess the reality is most are pretty capable. It's just a question of how well the company crafts their narrative.

why didnt you just ask that question?

[blown5.0]

Probably, but there may have been some interesting paths different companies took in pursuit of being "superior" in a specific application and I figure there are many on this board with that historical and technical knowledge which they could share.

Originally Posted by breitlings

why didnt you just ask that question?

[Greenwich Mean Time]

I don't know of any brand that is as good as Rolex when you consider the whole package. Sure one might have better lume, another might have as good or better a movement. But IMO they don't have the iconic look that is Rolex. At least in my not so humble opinion.

[jimcameron]

For quite some time, dive computers have made dive watches relegated to "backup only" status. Combine that with owner's of Rolex dive watches only actually using them as dive watches at way less than 1% of the time, and it's pretty easy to conclude that the difference between a Rolex dive watch and a Casio Duro is negligible.