Submariner vs Seamaster

[tmmii]

Plain and simple, the looks not there.

[bob78h]

The Seamaster is a nice watch, my first luxury watch was an older Bond model. The new one does look nice and at half the price of a Sub its a great value, but I still don't think it matches up to the Sub.

[Seibei]

Never compromise your values!

[Blackdog]

I think the new SMP300 is an excellent watch and comparable quality wise with the Sub.

But the Sub exudes classic design values and I find the design of the new SMP300 a bit too loud and detracting from it ever becoming a classic.

I prefer the style of this Seamaster instead. And an added advantage: NO HEV !!



But there's no better or worse at this level. It's more about personal preferences and design choices.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Blackdog

I think the new SMP300 is an excellent watch and comparable quality wise with the Sub.

But the Sub exudes classic design values and I find the design of the new SMP300 a bit too loud and detracting from it ever becoming a classic.

I prefer the style of this Seamaster instead. And an added advantage: NO HEV !!



But there's no better or worse at this level. It's more about personal preferences and design choices.

I forgot about this one, it's a great value and a worthy competitor.

[Loevhagen]

I've practically stopped wearing my Rolexes as I almost wear my Seamaster 300m 2018 blue instead.

[997]

easily the ugliest watch out there...

[Shihan]

Originally Posted by 997

easily the ugliest watch out there...

Easy there my friend..Some even find the Batman attractive...

[Bizcut1]

I tell you, the accuracy of my Seamaster M is deadly. It's running +/- 0 consistently.

It is a bit loud...but it is beautiful.

Ben

[Bizcut1]

Also...it doesn't feel as "tool watch" as the Sub.

Love 'em both.

[brandog]

Why would you want to buy a watch that's worth almost half of what you paid for it only after a few years?

[SN13]

Originally Posted by brandog

Why would you want to buy a watch that's worth almost half of what you paid for it only after a few years?

PROTIP:

Buy it used. ;)

[Montremoi]

Originally Posted by brandog

Why would you want to buy a watch that's worth almost half of what you paid for it only after a few years?

Err... because not everyone is a flipper ? o_O

[R G]

Originally Posted by brandog

Why would you want to buy a watch that's worth almost half of what you paid for it only after a few years?

Well, thank goodness that some watch people still buy what they actually like, rather than letting the ‘market’ steer their choice! Otherwise we would all be in ownership of the same mundane set of SS Rolex sports models (and yes I do own some of those models as well).

Watch collecting for many has seemingly turned in to an investment strategy, which isn’t in my opinion what the primary interest should be.

[Bizcut1]

Originally Posted by brandog

Why would you want to buy a watch that's worth almost half of what you paid for it only after a few years?

Because price and relative worth are just one aspect of this hobby...IMHO.

[Wcdhtwn]

In 1998 I chose a Seamaster over a Sub. Sub felt cheap, 5- digit bracelet didn’t compare to the Omega. Resale-wise the Rolex is much better, but since I am not selling my Omega I don’t care. My 1998 Seamaster keeps time with my GMT2 and my SD43. I won’t commit to one being better than the other, but for the price...

And availability...

[legedema]

def. submariner , it is not even close

[othertbone]

Originally Posted by greengold

Can I ask you guys how you compare the new diver 300 to the current Submariner? Many of the reviews think it's actually BETTER than the submariner which I find hard to believe but interested as I used to have the previous Seamaster model but got shot of it the moment I got a Sub as it felt inferior in every way

I am sure this has already been said, so please excuse me, but there is nothing to compare. I'm sure this would be the same answer on the omega forum though, lol.

[Onikage]

This thread got funnier.

[Panych]

Seamaster is too flashy for me and I do not like HEV crown. So, my choice is Sub. If Sub is the only watch - Sub Date, otherwise - ND.

[Rolex Essex]

Since the beginning of the year I’ve tried to persuade myself to like and buy the SMP. I’ve visited my local Omega AD numinous times to try it on, I even tried both bracelet and rubber strap. The TT version of SMP looked nasty IMO.





After months of deciding, I just can’t get over the skeleton hands, HEV and clumsy looking bracelet. Although the SMP is technically more advanced than Sub and SERIOUSLY a lot cheaper as one other AD I know were offering a massive discount on Omegas it just still wasn’t enough to convince me.

In the end I saved up and held it for Bluesy
In terms of fitment, quality, charm and presence, the Submariner comes out on top.

[Montremoi]

Originally Posted by Rolex Essex

After months of deciding, I just can’t get over the skeleton hands, HEV and clumsy looking bracelet.

Preach it. Also the 42mm size.

Now, if they put that gorgeous sun-brushed wavy dial on a 38mm Aquaterra, fitted with regular hands... that would be very tempting

[Pangit]

I have both. I bought the watches about two months apart about 9 months ago and love both but one win for the seamster is the clasp which allows easy on the wrist micro adjustments and is better than the glidelock in my opinion. I spent a month Island hopping in the Philippines back in April and I chose to take the Seamaster.

[Rolex Essex]

Watchfinder video

Omega Seamaster Pro vs Rolex Submariner
https://youtu.be/NoRstEITESg

[Mr. Superlative]

Originally Posted by Rolex Essex

Watchfinder video

Omega Seamaster Pro vs Rolex Submariner
https://youtu.be/NoRstEITESg

Very good video. Definitely worth viewing. Thanks for sharing.

[jvb.nc]

i bought a SM PO 2500 in 2008, because i wasn’t in a position then to acquire a sub. still have it, it’s climbed mountains and all kinds of crazy stuff. i love the caseback, and i wear it often at the beach (today, in fact, it’s on my wrist!). the dial-matched date window is also great.

but a submariner it ain’t.

[Finslayer83]

2254 with PO clasp for basically 1/3 of what a Sub costs.

For the money it is a better buy - sorry it is what it is.

Still has preferable features for me over a similar era Sub (AR, matte dial, easy to source OEM parts from the manufacturer, ETA service / parts availability).

That said I also like the Sub and have a similar era one (16610) which is my daily.

I can really treat the Omega like a sports watch and not care one bit - where as I try my best to do the same with the Sub....it being on wrist is always in my head. Hell I fully brushed my 2254 and strongly considering having it done on the Sub.

This is one of those "get both" moments in my opinion. That said I know there will always be the "Rolex or bust crowd" but they are good watches.

[shaunylw]

Originally Posted by Finslayer83

2254 with PO clasp for basically 1/3 of what a Sub costs.



For the money it is a better buy - sorry it is what it is.



Still has preferable features for me over a similar era Sub (AR, matte dial, easy to source OEM parts from the manufacturer, ETA service / parts availability).



That said I also like the Sub and have a similar era one (16610) which is my daily.



I can really treat the Omega like a sports watch and not care one bit - where as I try my best to do the same with the Sub....it being on wrist is always in my head. Hell I fully brushed my 2254 and strongly considering having it done on the Sub.



This is one of those "get both" moments in my opinion. That said I know there will always be the "Rolex or bust crowd" but they are good watches.

I totally agree, the 2254 is highly undervalued and maybe a better bang for the buck. I love the way you brushed yours, it looks amazing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sillo]

Originally Posted by Finslayer83

I can really treat the Omega like a sports watch and not care one bit

I have a 2254 and feel the exact same way. It's nice to put something on and just not care too much.

[Onikage]

Originally Posted by Finslayer83

2254 with PO clasp for basically 1/3 of what a Sub costs.

For the money it is a better buy - sorry it is what it is.

Still has preferable features for me over a similar era Sub (AR, matte dial, easy to source OEM parts from the manufacturer, ETA service / parts availability).

That said I also like the Sub and have a similar era one (16610) which is my daily.

I can really treat the Omega like a sports watch and not care one bit - where as I try my best to do the same with the Sub....it being on wrist is always in my head. Hell I fully brushed my 2254 and strongly considering having it done on the Sub.

This is one of those "get both" moments in my opinion. That said I know there will always be the "Rolex or bust crowd" but they are good watches.

The pinnacle of both brands. IMO