ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

MNDZA · 28 October 2010, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EchoBlueUK

Rolex for me. Omegas are nice watches and postioned correctly for their price point and target market. I'm not a big fan of the PO bezel. Size is good but little things like they still don't use screws in the bracelet etc. bug me. And everyone seems to have a PO these days.

I've had my PO for between 2 and 3 years and I have only seen one other person wearing that watch. I've seen many, MANY Rolexes though. Still, I love Rolex and just bought my first one!

jnkay · 28 October 2010, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EchoBlueUK

Rolex for me. Omegas are nice watches and postioned correctly for their price point and target market. I'm not a big fan of the PO bezel. Size is good but little things like they still don't use screws in the bracelet etc. bug me. And everyone seems to have a PO these days.

+1. Plus I don't love the bracelet design or HE valve. Actually much prefer the rubber strap.

cid · 3 December 2010, 02:49 PM

Po is a great watch but omega should have put 8500 in house movement. I own hour vision and sub jc. Hv movement is right on with lv. Both are beautiful watches.

jnkay · 28 October 2010, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EchoBlueUK

Rolex for me. Omegas are nice watches and postioned correctly for their price point and target market. I'm not a big fan of the PO bezel. Size is good but little things like they still don't use screws in the bracelet etc. bug me. And everyone seems to have a PO these days.

+1. Plus I don't love the bracelet design or HE valve. Actually much prefer the rubber strap. Oh yeah, don't love the arrow hands either. Great wrist presence, but when it comes down to the design details, prefer the sub.

jmsrolls · 28 October 2010, 12:15 PM

Both are good (not great) watches but I went with the LM primarily because of the bezel design. Omega got it right with the flush Liquidmetal numbers/markers - no risk of chipping or scratches with the Omega bezel.

And by the way, the dial is made of the same ceramic material as the bezel. Combined with the double AR coating, the dial is like looking into a deep dark pool.

Although the LM PO is a limited edition of 1948, Omega has not been able to keep up with demand. The Boutiques cannot keep them in stock.

Fr. John†

Sunster · 28 October 2010, 06:48 PM

Prefer the PO to the old Sub, but the Sub-c wins hands down

SC11 · 28 October 2010, 07:14 PM

Not sure on the amount of truth in this but have been told alot of the new design cues used in the PO LM will filter down into the new PO due to be released next year or so.

I have the Sub C and have been looking at the LM but think I'm leaning towards another Rolex.

Sam

thesmallwave · 3 December 2010, 07:23 AM

I like them both very much, but i decided to go for Sub C black.Rolex seem to be better per everything includding resale value.

Kanger · 3 December 2010, 07:45 AM

A very difficult choice despite that I own a Sub C. I would try and get both hehe

jekuo · 3 December 2010, 08:44 AM

The Omega is a bit heavy and the bracelet is harder to adjust. I don't care for the arrow shaped hands either on the PO. But I have a SMP Chrono on a rubber strap and love it. I just never liked the new POs that much.

seand442 · 3 December 2010, 09:23 AM

The LM is a sexy looking watch. But, the SubC is more my taste. I like the Rolex style a bit more. Not that I would turn down an Omega if I was given one, I just would rather have the sub.

DT14 · 3 December 2010, 10:07 AM

another vote for the Rolex.

tictocChuck · 3 December 2010, 12:00 PM

I bought a 42mm Omega PO, and kept it for a week, then returned it. Although a nice watch in it's own right, IMHO you can't beat a Submariner with it's quality and history.

HL65 · 3 December 2010, 02:50 PM

Rolex Sub C--because it is a Rolex--no further reasons-- Timeless icon!!

venom43 · 29 December 2010, 07:08 PM

PO LM for me.
Never liked the look of the sub, hence why I went with the yacht master. The YM looks better. For me I would rather say, "PO LM vs YM", due to both watches looking more like dress watches than "tool" watches.
Another reason why the PO LM, sure I've seen a few regular PO's walking around, but I've only seen my PO LM.

ElPrimero · 29 December 2010, 09:28 PM

Rolex for me thank you!

thesmallwave · 29 December 2010, 11:38 PM

I've seen the PO LM but didn't like it, looks better in pics.I choosed a Sub C black and i am very happy with it.

fc3s2k · 30 December 2010, 01:10 AM

SUB C 1st
PO LM 2nd

fc3s2k · 30 December 2010, 01:10 AM

SUB C 1st
PO LM 2nd

watchwatcher · 30 December 2010, 01:25 AM

As others have said, bracelet adjustment is an issue on the Omega...why would you make such an incredible timepiece that does not have micro adjustment capability?

Or, put another way, if you sat around and admired the looks of both pieces, I think they would both be stunning. But, at the end of the day, you're probably going to strap it on and wear it...possibly in different weather/humidity conditions...

Having said that, I have a PO which I dearly love (not the sexy LM version, but still awesome). But, for wearability alone, I would give the nod to the Sub-C and the glidelock clasp.

3 December 2010, 09:23 AM	#11
seand442 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Earth Watch: 116610 Posts: 3,455	The LM is a sexy looking watch. But, the SubC is more my taste. I like the Rolex style a bit more. Not that I would turn down an Omega if I was given one, I just would rather have the sub. __________________ NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. FIRST THEY WILL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL. THEN, THEY WILL BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.

3 December 2010, 02:50 PM	#14
HL65 TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Ken Location: SW Florida Watch: One on my wrist. Posts: 64,008	Rolex Sub C--because it is a Rolex--no further reasons-- Timeless icon!! __________________ *SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT*

29 December 2010, 07:08 PM	#15
venom43 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: NOR-CAL Watch: Grail Daytona Posts: 1,306	PO LM for me. Never liked the look of the sub, hence why I went with the yacht master. The YM looks better. For me I would rather say, "PO LM vs YM", due to both watches looking more like dress watches than "tool" watches. Another reason why the PO LM, sure I've seen a few regular PO's walking around, but I've only seen my PO LM. __________________ ROLEX:(116200)SS DATEJUST,(216570)SS EXPLORER II "POLAR",(116518-0073)YG DAYTONA,(116718)YG GMT MASTER IIc,(16610)SS SUBMARINER 50th LV,(16623)TT YACHT-MASTER ~BREITLING:SUPER OCEAN 44 ~JLC:NAVY SEALs ~OMEGA:PLANET OCEAN "LIQUIDMETAL LE" & (2201.51),SPEEEDMASTER PRO "METEORITE DIAL",SEAMASTER PRO GMT "GREAT WHITE" ~TUDOR:BLACK BAY(R)

30 December 2010, 01:10 AM	#18
fc3s2k "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Real Name: Barry Location: california Watch: OFFICINE PANERAI Posts: 1,289	SUB C 1st PO LM 2nd __________________

30 December 2010, 01:10 AM	#19
fc3s2k "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Real Name: Barry Location: california Watch: OFFICINE PANERAI Posts: 1,289	SUB C 1st PO LM 2nd __________________

3 December 2010, 02:49 PM	#3
cid Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: 35.0844° N, 106.6 Posts: 195	Po is a great watch but omega should have put 8500 in house movement. I own hour vision and sub jc. Hv movement is right on with lv. Both are beautiful watches.

28 October 2010, 12:15 PM	#5
jmsrolls Banned Join Date: May 2008 Location: USA Posts: 3,185	Both are good (not great) watches but I went with the LM primarily because of the bezel design. Omega got it right with the flush Liquidmetal numbers/markers - no risk of chipping or scratches with the Omega bezel. And by the way, the dial is made of the same ceramic material as the bezel. Combined with the double AR coating, the dial is like looking into a deep dark pool. Although the LM PO is a limited edition of 1948, Omega has not been able to keep up with demand. The Boutiques cannot keep them in stock. Fr. John†

28 October 2010, 06:48 PM	#6
Sunster "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 169	Prefer the PO to the old Sub, but the Sub-c wins hands down

28 October 2010, 07:14 PM	#7
SC11 Banned Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: Sam Location: UK Watch: AP ☠️ Posts: 6,151	Not sure on the amount of truth in this but have been told alot of the new design cues used in the PO LM will filter down into the new PO due to be released next year or so. I have the Sub C and have been looking at the LM but think I'm leaning towards another Rolex. Sam

3 December 2010, 07:23 AM	#8
thesmallwave Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Levi Location: Romania & England Watch: Sub C Black Posts: 568	I like them both very much, but i decided to go for Sub C black.Rolex seem to be better per everything includding resale value.

3 December 2010, 07:45 AM	#9
Kanger Banned Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Daniel Location: North Carolina Watch: Sea Dweller Posts: 5,524	A very difficult choice despite that I own a Sub C. I would try and get both hehe

3 December 2010, 08:44 AM	#10
jekuo Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: James Location: SoCal Watch: 16710B-M Series Posts: 288	The Omega is a bit heavy and the bracelet is harder to adjust. I don't care for the arrow shaped hands either on the PO. But I have a SMP Chrono on a rubber strap and love it. I just never liked the new POs that much.

3 December 2010, 10:07 AM	#12
DT14 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Dallas Watch: Daytona, Explorer Posts: 218	another vote for the Rolex.

3 December 2010, 12:00 PM	#13
tictocChuck Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Chuck Location: Seattle Watch: Rolex Submariner Posts: 256	I bought a 42mm Omega PO, and kept it for a week, then returned it. Although a nice watch in it's own right, IMHO you can't beat a Submariner with it's quality and history.

29 December 2010, 09:28 PM	#16
ElPrimero Banned Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: London Watch: DSSD Posts: 168	Rolex for me thank you!

29 December 2010, 11:38 PM	#17
thesmallwave Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Levi Location: Romania & England Watch: Sub C Black Posts: 568	I've seen the PO LM but didn't like it, looks better in pics.I choosed a Sub C black and i am very happy with it.

30 December 2010, 01:25 AM	#20
watchwatcher "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Larry Location: Kentucky Watch: Yes Posts: 35,047	As others have said, bracelet adjustment is an issue on the Omega...why would you make such an incredible timepiece that does not have micro adjustment capability? Or, put another way, if you sat around and admired the looks of both pieces, I think they would both be stunning. But, at the end of the day, you're probably going to strap it on and wear it...possibly in different weather/humidity conditions... Having said that, I have a PO which I dearly love (not the sexy LM version, but still awesome). But, for wearability alone, I would give the nod to the Sub-C and the glidelock clasp.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode