GMT for Omega... Yeo

[Floorguy]

I’d do it in a heartbeat!

[samson66]

I love and own Omega, and I love and own Tudor. I just wouldn't trade THAT Tudor for THAT Omega. There are plenty of Omegas I would love to own but with that particular trade at this particular time the GMT is the better side of that trade. You still pay a premium on the secondary market to get the GMT while the Omegas are offered at significant discounts used. The Omega may be the superior watch but the GMT is the superior end of that trade in my opinion.

[sickened1]

I'd keep the GMT.

[~JJ]

I’m a Tudor fan, but would make that deal in heartbeat. That Omega is a clear winner in this fight, for me.

[vipereaper30]

You are a very nice brother-in-law!

[EEpro]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Thanks for a great / informative post. Agree the movement within the OMEGA is more technically impressive, and that translates to durability and accuracy. With every METAS certified movement are test results of your specific timepiece (available online).

^^this is a big deal to me

[Bizcut1]

That Omega is nice - at least you know the date won't skip.

[Brny11]

Ew. Please no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mdx77]

Quick correction to my earlier post...watch has 9900 movement since it’s chronograph, but this even proves my point further beyond a shadow of a doubt:

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=717586

[Seaswirl]

Superior movement aside, this particular Omega chronograph is virtually unwearable at 45mm x a whopping 18.5mm thickness. I’d keep the Tudor.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by Seaswirl

Superior movement aside, this particular Omega chronograph is virtually unwearable at 45mm x a whopping 18.5mm thickness. I’d keep the Tudor.

Unwearable?? It’s one of my most comfortable divers I own. It’s specs are identical to the DSSD but has a larger face to bezel ratio which makes it look bigger than it is. I have worn it a lot this winter and it fits fine under my sleeves. The large flat sapphire case back spreads its weight and size out better than the SD43 or DSSD (I own them as well). If you can wear a SD43 or DSSD, then the POC is a easy wear. I had this POC on many dives this summer and it has shown to be a bit of a game changer as I found myself using the chronograph as well as the dive bezel together. I would use the chronograph to time my gears run time like battery life or motor run time and then use the bezel for the actual dive. Being able to push the chronograph buttons in the wet or underwater and without a shoulder screw down is a lot easier and more convenient. Button push is sharp and precise. Build quality and fit and finish is outstanding and you can take a loupe to the watch face and be delighted with what you see. The ceramic dial and markings are razor sharp and crisp. Chronograph hand alignment when running is perfect and accurate to each mark as it progresses. This means when you stop the chronograph there isn’t any confusion if the hand if leaning toward either dial markings. Easiest chronograph I have been able to read when using. Bezel and dial markers are always perfectly aligned.

[Seaswirl]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Unwearable?? It’s one of my most comfortable divers I own. It’s specs are identical to the DSSD but has a larger face to bezel ratio which makes it look bigger than it is. I have worn it a lot this winter and it fits fine under my sleeves. The large flat sapphire case back spreads its weight and size out better than the SD43 or DSSD (I own them as well). If you can wear a SD43 or DSSD, then the POC is a easy wear. I had this POC on many dives this summer and it has shown to be a bit of a game changer as I found myself using the chronograph as well as the dive bezel together. I would use the chronograph to time my gears run time like battery life or motor run time and then use the bezel for the actual dive. Being able to push the chronograph buttons in the wet or underwater and without a shoulder screw down is a lot easier and more convenient. Button push is sharp and precise. Build quality and fit and finish is outstanding and you can take a loupe to the watch face and be delighted with what you see. The ceramic dial and markings are razor sharp and crisp. Chronograph hand alignment when running is perfect and accurate to each mark as it progresses. This means when you stop the chronograph there isn’t any confusion if the hand if leaning toward either dial markings. Easiest chronograph I have been able to read when using. Bezel and dial markers are always perfectly aligned.

Should have clarified. Unwearable for those with smaller or average wrist size. I had the 42mm PO 8500 three hander which was 16mm thick, and I found it to be uncomfortable and top heavy. Loved the look, particularly the dial, and movement, but it was just way too big. I couldn’t imagine wearing the chronograph version at 18.5mm thick.

[jerryguo]

Get what you like, but i personally like the GMT better!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Seaswirl

Should have clarified. Unwearable for those with smaller or average wrist size. I had the 42mm PO 8500 three hander which was 16mm thick, and I found it to be uncomfortable and top heavy. Loved the look, particularly the dial, and movement, but it was just way too big. I couldn’t imagine wearing the chronograph version at 18.5mm thick.

I agree with you. I owned one and flipped it for that reason. Just like the JC Deep Sea. Too big for a 6.5” wrist. However that still doesn’t change the fact that it’s a superior timepiece to the Tudor.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by Seaswirl

Should have clarified. Unwearable for those with smaller or average wrist size. I had the 42mm PO 8500 three hander which was 16mm thick, and I found it to be uncomfortable and top heavy. Loved the look, particularly the dial, and movement, but it was just way too big. I couldn’t imagine wearing the chronograph version at 18.5mm thick.

I agree. The POC is a big alpha diver like the DSSD. It isn’t for everyone. For example, my favorite do-everything-size watch is my new BLNR. It is the watch I default to for everything from family vacations to what ever life brings. I can wear it with a swimsuit or suit. The 40mm size disappears on the wrist in any climate or activity. The alpha divers are purpose built technical watches and make a heck of a wrist presence. They are too loud and sporty for every activity and are suited as your ultimate sports watch in your collection. For reference in the pics, I have a 7.25” flat wrist.
Unfortunately my photobucket has been down for the last 3 weeks and it is where most all my comparison watch pics are for the forum. I have some great pics of all of the major players together and on my wrist. The POC and my DSSD JC together on my wrist tells the story best but I can’t access it.

Weight of the POC on bracelet is about 220 grams and about the same as the DSSD JC. POC on rubber will be around 190 grams.

Update: found a comparison pic. This is a optical illusion since both of these watches are really identical in size weight and thickness. It’s just the dial to bezel ratio is better on the POC and the DSSD has the “ring-lock” making the dial smaller.

[pepsiretail]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Unwearable?? It’s one of my most comfortable divers I own. It’s specs are identical to the DSSD but has a larger face to bezel ratio which makes it look bigger than it is. I have worn it a lot this winter and it fits fine under my sleeves. The large flat sapphire case back spreads its weight and size out better than the SD43 or DSSD (I own them as well). If you can wear a SD43 or DSSD, then the POC is a easy wear. I had this POC on many dives this summer and it has shown to be a bit of a game changer as I found myself using the chronograph as well as the dive bezel together. I would use the chronograph to time my gears run time like battery life or motor run time and then use the bezel for the actual dive. Being able to push the chronograph buttons in the wet or underwater and without a shoulder screw down is a lot easier and more convenient. Button push is sharp and precise. Build quality and fit and finish is outstanding and you can take a loupe to the watch face and be delighted with what you see. The ceramic dial and markings are razor sharp and crisp. Chronograph hand alignment when running is perfect and accurate to each mark as it progresses. This means when you stop the chronograph there isn’t any confusion if the hand if leaning toward either dial markings. Easiest chronograph I have been able to read when using. Bezel and dial markers are always perfectly aligned.

That is a great watch on you

[FreshPrince14]

I wouldn't but it's your call

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

[GreatScott]

Do you have another GMT? If yes, do it. That is a really awesome omega. If no, tough one, but probably a go for me.

[SPMN]

This is great! I can’t remember another hypothetical swap where the values were so similar, the sides were so evenly split, and the positions of both sides were so adamant. Both are great, good luck with the new watch!

[Ragna]

Not in a million years

[mountainjogger]

To words. N. O.

[pepsiretail]

Originally Posted by Ragna

Not in a million years

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

To words. N. O.

You guys mean only because of size right? Please tell me I’m right

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by pepsiretail

You guys mean only because of size right? Please tell me I’m right

Some people don’t understand or care that Omega is equal to Rolex and superior to Tudor.

Plus that is probably the coolest reference in Tudors lineup.

[Justinmg]

If you like the PO I would, both great watches.

[GADNYC]

These are totally different pieces, I can't get my mind around the swap w/o greater context to your collection. Do you have something similar to the Tudor GMT and nothing in Orange? than perhaps it's a go.

[Amochosto]

Originally Posted by Mystro

I would do that without hesitation. Being as objective with both watches as possible the reality is the Omega POC is a better watch and movement on every level by a comfortable margin. It’s not just a little bit better movement but a lot better. I could go into detail why and in my own personal testing has shown the Omega movement to be better but I won’t bore you with the details. That 9900 Master Chronometer crushes any movement I have ever tested, Rolex included. The amplitude power and consistency in all positions is on another level the way Omega uses their twin barrel mainsprings. The watch case itself is the only hard core diver where the buttons are designed to push under water.


I honestly can’t believe your brother-in-law would consider that trade. Trade now before he changes his mind.

Originally Posted by mdx77

Technically speaking, PO is hands down the better watch all day long. 8900 Co-ax is a better movement than the MT5652 and even in a rubber strap is still @$1000 more than the Tudor GMT on a bracelet. Before some of you lose your mind, here’s why.......not only is the Omega COSC certified, it is also METAS certified....long story short, the movement, as well as function, of each watch is exposed to magnetic fields over 15,000 gauss and required accuracy of between 0 and +5 seconds per day in a series of varying positions and temperatures. METAS certification is far more rigorous than COSC when it comes to accuracy and the peace of mind of not having to worry about everyday magnetism. This watch still doesn’t get the credit it deserves - partially because of the size, but it has a great history. With all that said, the Tudor is a great watch too and as long as you’re happy, that’s all that matters.

I think these comments pretty much sum it up. The only reasonable argument to stay with the Tudor is aesthetic reasons, the extra size of the Omega, or a requirement for a GMT function. From a value perspective the PO is on par with Rolex Sport models on an MSRP basis, and it is still worth more in the secondary market, and the technical and functional achievements of the PO dominate the GMT.

All that said the PO is huge, I’m not sure I could be comfortable with it on, being a mm in every dimension than my DSSD that I seem to bash on everything.

[Amochosto]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Unwearable?? It’s one of my most comfortable divers I own. It’s specs are identical to the DSSD but has a larger face to bezel ratio which makes it look bigger than it is. I have worn it a lot this winter and it fits fine under my sleeves. The large flat sapphire case back spreads its weight and size out better than the SD43 or DSSD (I own them as well). If you can wear a SD43 or DSSD, then the POC is a easy wear. I had this POC on many dives this summer and it has shown to be a bit of a game changer as I found myself using the chronograph as well as the dive bezel together. I would use the chronograph to time my gears run time like battery life or motor run time and then use the bezel for the actual dive. Being able to push the chronograph buttons in the wet or underwater and without a shoulder screw down is a lot easier and more convenient. Button push is sharp and precise. Build quality and fit and finish is outstanding and you can take a loupe to the watch face and be delighted with what you see. The ceramic dial and markings are razor sharp and crisp. Chronograph hand alignment when running is perfect and accurate to each mark as it progresses. This means when you stop the chronograph there isn’t any confusion if the hand if leaning toward either dial markings. Easiest chronograph I have been able to read when using. Bezel and dial markers are always perfectly aligned.

Dammit! I want this watch and you are making it harder to avoid!! I think if you just remembered to start the chronograph at the right time you could use that right hand subdial as a second time zone on your travels. So no need for a GMT.

[007timer]

Originally Posted by MARTIN1264

Maybe.... I like Omega, Is that a Planet Ocean.

It is a PO yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk