What if the best Rolex is now an Omega

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by JP.

Think about this:

When the "Bond Seamaster" was brand new, it was considered a competitor of the 16610 Submariner. Back then the Sub was 2 1/2 times more expensive.

Now the full set Submariner is 4-5 times more expensive in the preowned market.

Bond SMP will never be as desirable as the Sub but at least Omega offers superb value. Sub is definitely not 4-5 times better watch (if at all).

Oh yeah... I'm happy to say that I own both.

I always liked that 90s Seamaster 300m, great design

[johnorpheus]

Originally Posted by JRell

I don’t agree at all. Non watch people always relate the Rolex sub to bond. Omega came in late as a PR effort. I agree with the above comments. Omega feels like a 500 watch compared to Rolex. Also the dials and bezels are just awkward looking. If you have an Omega it better be a speedmaster.

Well I can tell you that applies to no one in their 30s or younger so we’re probably talking about a different demo. Everyone my age sees Bond as Daniel Craig and Omega as his brand. Just my repeated observation. If I was talking to people 50 or older I’m sure they would feel different.

My Omega feels just as good as my Rolex to me, and it’s not a Speedmaster.

[SaddleSC]

I just purchased the Trilogy Railmaster and absolutely love it. I also have the Explorer 214270 and I go back and forth between which one is my favorite. The RM is such a great vintage reissue and the movement is deadly accurate. Love it!

[RyanJ]

I have a Railmaster and an Explorer and like them both. What I do like about the version of the Railmaster I have is the brushed finish.

Photo from Omega's website:

[Krash]

I love Omega watches. I love the Railmaster.

But the best Rolex watch is not an Omega.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BLNR Nairobi]

Originally Posted by Innocenti

Mr literal

Actually, yes. I do tend to be quite literal on most things.

However, I wasn’t being literal here. But let me try to be …Omega and Rolex occupy different segments, and the gulf has continued to widen. Not to say Rolex is better or Omega is better …they are just, different.

I could go on and on about reasons why and also why it is unlikely to change (Omega being part of Swatch gives them certain advantages, but also comes at a big cost in myriad ways), I could discuss brand value and how certain companies have eroded it (but looking at sales reports would do that faster, and even faster would be to see which ADs are full of watches collecting dust outside a few premier models, and which ADs even lack the most basic entry models), but that would be a waste of time.

I think it’s sufficient to say what I’d said before. Both brands are great, in their own ways. But not only is the best Rolex not an Omega, but the two brands (as a whole) are operating on different loci.

Like comparing Formula One with NASCAR.

Both have fast cars, but they are as different as chalk and cheese. And no, none is necessarily better …just different.

Also, I hope your angst on the other thread resulting in you not liking Rolex much has abated a bit. They’re just watches bro! :)

[Guinness58]

Originally Posted by JRell

I don’t agree at all. Non watch people always relate the Rolex sub to bond. Omega came in late as a PR effort. I agree with the above comments. Omega feels like a 500 watch compared to Rolex. Also the dials and bezels are just awkward looking. If you have an Omega it better be a speedmaster.

Hate to say this but I think it depends on a person’s age. The older generation who think of 007 as Sean Connery will link him with Rolex. (This includes me BTW.). The younger generation most likely will think of Daniel Craig and Omega. Just my two cents.

I agree with the Omega Speedmaster comment which is a classic design. I could never warm up to their dive watches which remind me of pinball machines.

[zengineer]

I had the 60th Speedmaster and it was a very well made watch, perfect proportions and very "affordable". That being said I sold it after a year because I couldn't unsee the fake patina.

To be fair to Rolex and pile onto the comparison train...Rolex would not do fake patina. The do what I believe are some very questionable "upgrades", including the ceramic Daytona bezel (I know I am in a small minority that finds it atrocious) but at least it isn't faux aging.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by Innocenti

So if we accept that 1016 with a nice patina is the best Rolex ever.

But its age and value mean it’s no longer a practical everyday watch.
Then is the omega railmaster 60th the one?

I don’t follow you OP. Very Confusing post. Not making any sense to me. With all due respect, You are mixing apples and elephants and are forgetting about context and horology it seems.

[Onequik135i]

My previous 2504.52 reminded me more of the 1016, I should have kept it instead of selling it last year.

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by JRell

Non watch people always relate the Rolex sub to bond.

Yea... no. Maybe if you and the person being questioned are > 70. Everyone else currently recognizes Omega as the watch on James Bond’s wrist.





People also rarely read books anymore. Especially James Bond novels. So the Rolex as James Bond’s watch is history and closely approaching mythology

[juliet]

I don't get it. Is your supposition that the 1016 is the best watch, but you can't buy one and therefore need to choose something more attainable?

Surely that means a 124270 is your best bet?

Or are you meaning that you want a new watch that looks old?

Personally I'm more worried that my tool watches are now getting so bloody valuable that I don't seem to enjoy wearing them as much anymore.

[Juggernaut]

Great topic. The Railmaster is a bulkier watch even with the 19mm bracelet...it doesn’t taper. With the long (48mm?) lug to lug it wears more like a 39mm.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by bp1000

When people manage to get past the status of the crown, you really do start to wake up to some truly incredible watches from other brands.

This omega rail master is certainly one of them. As is their aqua terra (strangely priced) as the 300m on rubber is cheaper I believe and one hell of a watch.

Many options from JLC too.

But I think, when it comes to it, despite the Omega being technically superior and a fraction of the price. For most, the logo wins.

I agree 100%. I think bon today’s day and age of the the instabooks, the logo wins and it obscures some really great watches out there. The recent hype of the aquanaut and nautilus are also examples of instahype. When they were cheaper and easily available there were plenty to be had. Once the instabook got hold of things and folks that had Rolex wanted to feel even more special they went up to PP. shame is those folks miss the best of what PP does and that’s their chronos.

[RoscoPico]

Originally Posted by bp1000

When people manage to get past the status of the crown, you really do start to wake up to some truly incredible watches from other brands.

This omega rail master is certainly one of them. As is their aqua terra (strangely priced) as the 300m on rubber is cheaper I believe and one hell of a watch.

Many options from JLC too.

But I think, when it comes to it, despite the Omega being technically superior and a fraction of the price. For most, the logo wins.

well said

both amazing watches though op

[Juggernaut]

Originally Posted by Onequik135i

My previous 2504.52 reminded me more of the 1016, I should have kept it instead of selling it last year.

Yeah, I had that one 2 and regrettably sold it after talking myself into thinking. 36mm is too small for my 6.75” wrist
It had the painted and all lumed numbers and a truly matte dial.
What bugged me is the broad arrow on the minute hand instead of the hour and the finicky clasp.

[spacebjorn]

They're cool watches and a speedster pro is a must have for any serious collector.

But for my money, if I were to venture beyond the crown I'm likely going to be looking PP, AP, VC and ALS.

Graduating out of Rolex needs to feel like a substantial upgrade in brand + horology. Unfortunately, Omega just isn't it...at least for now.

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by BLNR Nairobi

Omega makes good watches.

But Omega is not Rolex (in the same way Rolex is not Omega).

They scratch different itches, and that’s a good thing. However it is disingenuous to claim the best Rolex is now an Omega in the same way it would be silly to suggest the best Omega is now a Rolex.

I can understand people have hurt feelings about Rolex accessibility (seen the other thread), but that doesn’t warp reality.

With that said, I like the Railmaster. Even though Omega has a somewhat muddled lineup (eg 45.5mm Planet Ocean 600m divers with a chrono function …!!!), I’ve always had a liking for many of the Railmasters.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro