Rolex Milguss VS GV VS Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 15,000 Gauss

[speedy_master1]

what are you thoughts compering the 2 watches. i have the mil gauss GV but i was wondering what are you thoughts about the omega 15000 GAUSS. I haven't yet seen a comparison vid. also is the the first from omega.

[Cru Jones]

The Omega's bumblebee hand is goofy and the overall design leaves me cold. The extra gauss protection doesn't mean much to me when compared to the Milgauss, which is a very cool and handsome piece. GV everyday and twice on Sundays.

YMMV.

[SearChart]

I prefer the Milgauss.

[Passionata]

Gv

[R.J.]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

The Omega's bumblebee hand is goofy and the overall design leaves me cold. The extra gauss protection doesn't mean much to me when compared to the Milgauss, which is a very cool and handsome piece. GV everyday and twice on Sundays.

YMMV.

Couldn't agree more.

[capote]

The technology behind the Omega is far more impressive. The movement itself is amagnetic. The Milgauss just use a Faraday cage. Still the second hand on the Omega is a bit too obvious nod to the inferior Milgauss.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

The Omega's bumblebee hand is goofy

And the lightning bolt is any better?

[The GMT Master]

The fact that Omega have tried to ape the Milgauss so much aesthetically bugs me - I think it undermines what they have done technically. It is a massive leap forward in watchmaking, this movement will become their standard movement - magnetism will no longer be an issue for Omega's mechanical watches, that's truly phenomenal. Price point is excellent too, and the Aqua Terra's proportions does mean it sits well on the wrist, I do find the Milgauss can be a little top heavy.

So, to sum up, the AT <15000 Gauss is technically incredible, but the design is so similar to the Milgauss, it takes some of the shine off what should be a crowning achievement

[The GMT Master]

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

The fact that Omega have tried to ape the Milgauss so much aesthetically bugs me -

The watch looks like the AT line. I wonder if you go back to sell Omega if your opinion will change one more time. just saying.

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by FTX I

The watch looks like the AT line. I wonder if you go back to sell Omega if your opinion will change one more time. just saying.

Of course it looks like the Aqua Terra line, it is an Aqua Terra. The second hand and polished centre links have been the change, and that has made it look very similar to the Milgauss. My opinion is my opinion, I don't see how that has any relevance to what I sell. No need to be passive aggressive, just saying

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Of course it looks like the Aqua Terra line, it is an Aqua Terra. The second hand and polished centre links have been the change, and that has made it look very similar to the Milgauss. My opinion is my opinion, I don't see how that has any relevance to what I sell. No need to be passive aggressive, just saying

Don't mean to be aggressive. just dont think its fair to detract this model, since the milgauss also have many debatable aspects. both are great for those who like them.

[woodsworth]

Something about the AT 15k Gauss' second hand that just irks me.

I'd go for the Rolex in this case, which I am not a huge fan of either, mind you.

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Don't mean to be aggressive. just dont think its fair to detract this model, since the milgauss also have many debatable aspects. both are great for those who like them.

Fair enough, tone can be misinterpreted via the written word

I think my assessment is fair - nothing is above criticism, and I think the concept of the watch is fantastic. I just think that Omega could have taken the look of the watch in a different direction to avoid such obvious comparisons with the Milgauss as a funky second hand. For the record, I really like the second hand on the Milgauss, it's a bit of fun.

By making the two watches look so similar, especially to the layman, I think it undermines the impact and the significance of the watch. They had an opportunity to really show it off - given their new experimentation with ceramics, wouldn't it have been great to have the new movement in a ceramic case? Make it a real showcase for their technical abilities, and avoid comparisons to existing models

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Fair enough, tone can be misinterpreted via the written word

[capote]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

I just think that Omega could have taken the look of the watch in a different to avoid such obvious comparisons with the Milgauss as a funky second hand

While I do agree about the second hand its really a non-issue since Omega will put anti-magnetic movements in all their watches sooner or later, contrary to Rolex.

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by capote

While I do agree about the second hand its really a non-issue since Omega will put anti-magnetic movements in all their watches sooner or later, contrary to Rolex.

Absolutely true, which is why I would have liked to have seen something unique and spectacular to mark the moment

[TimeOnMyHands]

I owned a GV and I would give the nod to the Omega here hands down.

Uses technology not an iron cage to achieve the Gauss rating.
One could argue it has a more sophisticated, more accurate movement.
It has a date window, something which many (including myself) want in a watch.
Open case back to view the movement.
It has a standard four year warranty, twice that of any Rolex and a longer service interval.
And I do not mind the look of it. I feel it like many, will be much nicer in person.

[AK797]

GV, the lightning bolt looks conservative by comparison.

[Cc1966]

Originally Posted by AK797

GV, the lightning bolt looks conservative by comparison.

x2

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

I'd pick this over the Milgauss every day of the week.

[karmatp]

Both of the second hands are horrific looking. I had a GV and cold not warm up to the silly lightning bolt hand, sold it soon after purchase.

[ecsub44]

Originally Posted by bayerische

I'd pick this over the Milgauss every day of the week.

I agree.

I prefer the aesthetics of the Omega.

But the green crystal of the GV is stunning.

[Stellite]

I like them both. But if they within 10% in price, I will go with Rolex every time.

[Jack T]

Both have a funky second hand, but that Omega has some very strong attributes. Purpose-built anti magnetic, and the 8500 movement is top notch. Everything else about both watches is personal preference.

[Surfrider]

I think the AT in general is one of the most beautiful watches. I like the Milgauss too, but it's just sort of boring to me for some reason, although the green glass is cool and I love the lightning bolt second hand. I personally think the AT's second hand is pretty cool, except I'm not a fan of the black/yellow combo in almost any application. If both had a date, I'd prob still go for the AT, but since the Mil doesn't have a date, definitely would choose the AT. I don't think I could do w/o a date feature, but that's just me.

[venom43]

Myself I like the bumble bee look of this version of an AT. I do agree with others that they didn't try that hard with the design, and for a ground breaker they should have had the "bling" factor that makes you not think of the rolex product.
Example: Like with what they did with the PO LM.


Sent from my can using a string....

[Ardalan]

I like the omega one better

[Rickn]

The gv does nothing for me. Omega all the way. That said anything else omega v. Rolex, give me the rolex

[jphj012]

The bumble bee looks nice but prefer GV all the way in terms of looks.

In terms of value, try and resell both watches and lets see which watch has depreciated the most, which would be the bumble bee.