Speedy Pro or Subs

[D.Ace]

Guys, I have a dilemma right now....
I am thinking of getting either one of this for my first upgrade everyday watch:
a speedmaster pro or Subs no date

Speedy:
More functions, looks cool

Subs:
Iconic, classic, better brand name.

Another thing, how much does the speedy pro weigh?

Please give me your opinions

[kyle L]

I'd think the Sub would be more of a beater, it might last longer, and it would fit every occasion. The Pro has a hestalite crystal, which may not be ideal if you want to use it as a beater. But both are great watches with alot of history, you can't go wrong with either choice!

[jmsrolls]

Originally Posted by kyle L

I'd think the Sub would be more of a beater, it would last longer, and it would fit every occasion. The Pro has a hestalite crystal, which may not be ideal if you want to use it as a beater. But both are great watches with alot of history, you can't go wrong with either choice!

Last longer? My Speedy Pro is 44 years old and runs and looks like new.

In 1965, it could be bought for around $150 and I have refused a recent offer of $5500 for it. And Omega will still repair and service it if need be. (Over 44 years, I did have to replace the mainspring.)

And no other watch has the history and mystery of the Speedmaster Professional. (Don't take what you read in Jake's Blog at face value, Kyle. Do your own research. Do not rely on his "research".)

Fr. John†

[kyle L]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

Last longer? My Speedy Pro is 44 years old and runs and looks like new.

In 1965, it could be bought for around $150 and I have refused a recent offer of $5500 for it. And Omega will still repair and service it if need be. (Over 44 years, I did have to replace the mainspring.)

And no other watch has the history and mystery of the Speedmaster Professional. (Don't take what you read in Jake's Blog at face value, Kyle. Do your own research. Do not rely on his "research".)

Fr. John†

Ok, maybe I should change my response to both watches would probably last a lifetime. I'm sure there are some Sub owners that have probably had their watches for a long, long time. Both of them are great choices, and you can't really go wrong with either.

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

Last longer? And Omega will still repair and service it if need be. (Over 44 years, I did have to replace the mainspring.)

Fr. John†

Thats one thing I like about OMEGA that ROLEX doesnt do and that is service every piece they EVER made !
Randy

[greekbum]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

Last longer? My Speedy Pro is 44 years old and runs and looks like new.In 1965, it could be bought for around $150 and I have refused a recent offer of $5500 for it.
Fr. John†

The new Omega is not the Omega of the era as your watch.The name is the only thing thats the same to me.I personally don't think there is any comparison of the new Omega with any new Rolex. What is there really to compare? A new Omega is 2nd maybe even 3rd class compared to a Rolex At the end of the day you buy what you like not what anybody here saysIs walmart selling Omega yet? Sams Club has em When my friends ask me about buying a new Omega I tell them to buy an Invicta and keep saving to buy a real watch
Vintage Omega,Zenith,Etc Etc is a different story

[Bullyterrier]

Originally Posted by greekbum

The new Omega is not the Omega of the era as your watch.The name is the only thing thats the same to me.I personally don't think there is any comparison of the new Omega with any new Rolex. What is there really to compare? A new Omega is 2nd maybe even 3rd class compared to a Rolex At the end of the day you buy what you like not what anybody here saysIs walmart selling Omega yet? Sams Club has em When my friends ask me about buying a new Omega I tell them to buy an Invicta and keep saving to buy a real watch
Vintage Omega,Zenith,Etc Etc is a different story

That reminds me of the thread a week ago regarding the person that had a Patek saying the same sort of statements towards Rolex. He thought Rolex were mass produced junk.

[greekbum]

Originally Posted by Bullyterrier

That reminds me of the thread a week ago regarding the person that had a Patek saying the same sort of statements towards Rolex. He thought Rolex were mass produced junk.

It was my thread and to him they were but to me they werent.The new Omegas are not mass produced junk but are they to compare as an equal to a Rolex?In my book not even close or in the same building.I own many vintage Omegas and wouldnt trade them even for a Vintage Rolex.The new ones are not the same my friend. Opinions were asked of opinions were offered.We dont have to agree. It was my opinion and opinions are like As@holes everybody has one. Its friday its a Rolex forum lets talk Rolex. At the end of the day you buy and wear what you like and to hell with everybody else

[Speed]

I have both

I do find myself wearing / loving the Sub a bit more. However, you can get a new Speedy for $2500 - PM me for a good AD if you like.

A pre-owned / NIB Sub will go for 3500-4500...

Speedy pro feels light to me..

[sleddog]

For me,the Sub no date without question!!!
Will last a life time............

[cody p]

i probably prefer the speedy at this point - but if this is your 'first foray' into luxury watch ownership, then i think the rolex is the better 'horological' choice.

[icnbne]

As an owner of both: i would recommend the Speedy Pro.
Its just an amazing watch, in every aspect. The Speedy is just as- if more iconic than the Sub and is just as classic.



As a tool watch, the hesalite is ideal as it doesn't shatter and even though it scratches easily, you can just as easily remove them.

[cody p]

Originally Posted by children

As an owner of both: i would recommend the Speedy Pro.
Its just an amazing watch, in every aspect. The Speedy is just as- if more iconic than the Sub and is just as classic.



As a tool watch, the hesalite is ideal as it doesn't shatter and even though it scratches easily, you can just as easily remove them.

the more i see the speedy... it's really hard to find a flaw with it; it's almost aesthetically perfect - the platonic ideal of a sports chronograph.

[icnbne]

Originally Posted by cody p

the more i see the speedy... it's really hard to find a flaw with it; it's almost aesthetically perfect - the platonic ideal of a sports chronograph.

the price really baffles me though, if it were a rolex it'll easily be double or even triple the price..
yeah, there are very few flaws of this watch

[D.Ace]

Thanks all for the inputs......

I agree both are very nice and iconic watches of their respective brands.

After sale service is also a major part of my consideration.

In terms of their static weight on the wrist, which one feels more substantial?

For the speedy, there are 3 similar variations: pro, anniversary and the co-axial, any thoughts on these? thanks

[Strut99GT]

Originally Posted by D.Ace

In terms of their static weight on the wrist, which one feels more substantial?

The Speedy Pro. 139 grams on bracelet. Rolex Sub: 127 grams. On a side-note, my Seamasater Professional is 146 grams, which is why the Sub always feels "light" to me when I try it on - the SMP is 15% heavier, after all.

[Speed]

[sushisummo]

Sub.........

[icnbne]

i really love my sub, so it really hurts me to say this..
but on the wrist the speedy feels more 'substantial' due to the far superior bracelet and clasp, i haven't weighted both of them, but the weight seems very similar (keeping in mind one is TT and other is SS).

[Speed]

My speedy is now on a black Shark strap. Very light!

[AIKO]

I know that Speedmasters have a following but they have never done anything for me. Submariner!

[sakuraba]

Originally Posted by AIKO

I know that Speedmasters have a following but they have never done anything for me. Submariner!

+1 Go Sub!

[Genevapics]

I own both the Speedmaster Professional and a Rolex Submariner... in fact, they are the ONLY watches I own. Both are classic timepieces and you cannot go wrong with either one.

[Deyn Man]

both are classics! can't go wrong with either..

however, i think you can already get a speedy and a seamaster for the price of a sub (well at least where i come from)...

[Singslinger]

I own both watches. Both are timeless classics but offer different pros and cons. For instance, I love using the Sub's rotatable bezel but find the Speedy to have a better bracelet and clearly better clasp.

I actually don't like to have to wind the Speedy every couple of days so I prefer the automatic mechanism in the Sub.

Overalll servicing cost for the Speedy is less than the Sub, but only marginally so.

You really can't go wrong with either, since they're considered icons by watch fans.

[dp2007]

I've owned both of these watches and both wear well and look good. I owned a speedy bought about 1972 for £125 GBP, the watch was stolen. I decided to replace the watch recently, the first one gained minutes in a matter of days and was sent back, the replacement wasn't much better and the sale refunded much to the credit and service of the AD. The Roles sub bought earlier this year appears to have no such accuracy problems.

The original Omega Speedmaster from 1972 was a credit to Omega, worn daily and the chronograph regularly used it was a tool, it was never serviced and worked perfectly and was extremely accurate only needing adjustment if it stopped, rarely.

[slcbbrown]

For a first, and maybe only, watch, I'd go Rolex. I sure like the looks/complications/bargain price of the Omega, but I wore my TT GMT (1974) until I gave it to a son two years ago.

Now, I wear my father's TT T-bird that was purchased in the 50's. This is no knock on the Omega.

[CyberPaol]

Sub...forever!

[Gurmot]

Both if you can. Here are mine, both from 1967.


If I had to choose, my head would say sub but my heart would say Speedy. I wear a Speedy 5x more than a sub.

Cheers - Simon

[alant]

Sub! Always!