Do you have a sub and a Pacific (edit Planet) Ocean?

[Israguard]

Bear in mind I'm like a 2 years old. I like shiny and pretty things..

A Rolex is a Rolex is a Relex and not many substitutes. The PO IMHO may do same thing and so will a $500 Seiko. It ain't a Rolex.

The orange Omegas are stunning and to me that's a serious time piece. Looking at cost.. I'd spend another 1k or 2k and get the watch that in 20-25 years will still be the king.. ROLEX.

[Mystro]

King of what??? Marketing, service cost, abandoning their classic watches,etc???
This was meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek but there are some real concerns with the direction of Rolex.

Originally Posted by Israguard

20-25 years will still be the king..

[Israguard]

Fair question. Direction of Rolex?? Nobody knows and I personally don't spend 2 seconds wondering.

But to a guy like me who knows nothing about watches other than I like Rolexes for the look and what they represent at times.. I personally feel that current watches I own will continue to do same in future.

My AD sells AP, Lange, Omega, Hublot and a few others and he has a large inventory. None turn my crank as much as the Rolexes do.

Maybe as I ate that will change.. Who knows?

[rohardi]

I would say go Sub as your first choice. It's beyond classic. It goes with just about any outfit!

[Alain Lee]

My first watch was the subc. I couldnt get the PO 8500 out of my head despite having the subc and a tt dj2. so to settle the score once and for all, pulled the trigger on the PO, and I couldnt be more happier!

These 3 watches will be enough for the time being. as I could not justify another watch purchase. A JLC master compressor will be next, but that will be atleast 2 years.

[kk77]

I have both. I like them both. For me, Sub C is more classy and PO is more sporty. That's just my opinion.

[tudorluv]

I really admire that orange bezel 42mm PO.

[Eric88]

I really like both. The issue I had with the PO is the case back dug into my wrist and overall weight/balance made it less comfortable on my small wrist.

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by Mystro

King of what??? Marketing, service cost, abandoning their classic watches,etc???
This was meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek but there are some real concerns with the direction of Rolex.

Maybe the "King of Bling" in 25 years, if things continue in their current direction.

[pk_diver]

Originally Posted by seabreeze

My question is to some of you have both? Does it seem like a waste?

I have both SubND and PO (and SD and SMP): no doubt it is a waste Any watch costing thousand of bucks is a waste!

If you aim to have one only watch, I'd recommend the Sub, since that was your first desire, go for it. If you feel you'll be turning into a watch enthisiast, Sub and PO and many other can easily live togheter

In terms of quality they are different watches, each one has pros and cons, ther is no "better".

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by ChuckFinlay

Both great watches, con for me with the 8500 movement PO's is the increase in thickness on what feels to me a less spread out base, so less diameter and too much height. The other thing I have in favour of the Sub is the glide lock which enables perfect sizing, again something I could never quite get right on my PO.

Thickness and cramped dial of PO, and beauty of glidelock is what sold me on subc.

Plus, my subc will prob never be worth less than what I paid for it (9% discount and no tax at pre-june 2012 price).

[jvo300]

Redundant pieces? Perhaps. The PO (the 2500) represents an exceptional value, but the Rolex is perfection. I have to admit that the Omegas get almost no wrist time since I added the SubC. However, I don't yet have the heart to part with any of them.

[Shaver]

See if you can get hold of a 2500 to try on against the 8500 if you decide on a Omega PO. I bought a 2500 "D" rather than the 8500 as I found the latter was too high & bulky although it has a "supposedly" better inhouse movement. I still pine for a Sub but when I weigh up the way the band blends in better on the PO, the luminosity on the hands that never conflict with each other & look like the Mercedes Hands on my Tag Heuer (as does the Sub). But I do like the new micro band adjustment on the new Sub as against full & half links on the PO. The PO is 600mtrs as against 300 on the Sub with good AR on both sides & HE Valve. I personally think the PO is a more modern type of watch face against the Sub, but having said that on my next trip overseas I will be keeping a lookout for a bargain Sub if one exists.

[seabreeze]

Originally Posted by cop414

Seabreeze,
I don't have a PO but do own a Seamaster 2254.50. As someone posted above you do get a lot of "bang for your buck" with Omega. When I was sourcing my Sub last summer I did get prices on PO's and they had jumped a lot since I got my Seamaster 5 years earlier but even with that being said you still get a great value for your dollar with the Omega line. However in your heart of hearts I think that you know you want the Sub...

I do like the sea master over the PO as I am exploring them.....maybe towards summer but right now I AM BASKING IN THE PLEASURE OF CALLING MY AD AND PULLING THE TRIGGER ON A SUB.

Thanks for all your encouragement I will be making bseperate post about it.

[Shaver]

jvo 300,

How does the Subc wear on the wrist compared with the PO, is it as heavy ? You stated that you tend to wear the Sub more, is that because it is more comfortable ?

[Eric88]

Originally Posted by Shaver

jvo 300,

How does the Subc wear on the wrist compared with the PO, is it as heavy ? You stated that you tend to wear the Sub more, is that because it is more comfortable ?

SubC wears much lighter than PO, from my experience.

[Shaver]

Thanks for that Eric88 ! I have found the 2500 PO heavy to wear on a daily basis, especially when you sweat & it rides down over your wrist even though the band is quiet tight. I don't know how people struggle with the 8500, but I will be looking forward to trying on a SubC.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by Shaver

Thanks for that Eric88 ! I have found the 2500 PO heavy to wear on a daily basis, especially when you sweat & it rides down over your wrist even though the band is quiet tight. I don't know how people struggle with the 8500, but I will be looking forward to trying on a SubC.

The sub us def the most comfortable of the lot. The omega smp is the more comfortable omega.

[AK797]

I think theres not much in it between the old sub and PO 2500 but the new Subc is def a step up in class and quality. I prefer the Subs ceramic bezel, the glidelock and the size as its better balanced and not as thick as the 8500. And looks wise the Subc is much easier on the eye imho.

[Spartan]

I had the 8500 PO SS version, just found it a bit heavy for everyday...Liked it so much I traded it for the same watch, but in Titanium, much much more comfortable (142grams)....
The Sub-C is nice as well, but I chose the GMT2-C instead... it just "feels" bigger on my 7.5" wrist

[boywondergq1]

I had two PO's, and whilst beautiful, I found impractical and top heavy for every day wear. The crowns would dig into my wrist from the sheer weight. I had the 45.5mm 2500 versions.

[jvo300]

Originally Posted by Eric88

SubC wears much lighter than PO, from my experience.

+1

Also, the weight feels better distributed across the watch head where the PO feels very tip heavy.

[Rashid.bk]

I have both, but a DSSD and PO. I tell you what, that PO's dial is amazing and as another poster said..I too would buy another Omega before another Rolex.
I have the older 2500 movement but have been blown away buy the orange bezel 8500, so that is my next watch.
They are very different and each has a specific qualities. In my opinion for the price, aesthetics and features the PO is a better watch and I would choose it over the Sub any day. The only exception being the Hulk and thats just based on the color. The dial legibility and lume is incredible on the PO. Imho any one who dismisses the PO just hasn't seen one in hand.
Get them both, I promise you will see them both drastically different.

[submariner123]

imo the Sub is much better looking than the Planet Ocean, and Rolex is just head and shoulders above Omega.

[watchf]

Just another note from my past ownership of the 2500 45mm PO orange bezel is that its one hell of a beast Its huge and heavy in weight. The first thing the jeweler said when the watch was handed back to me after resizing was "That sure is big and heavy". I had to get the shop to resize it as I couldn't get one section of the link pin out as it was extremely tight. The new 8500 uses screw pin like Rolex which is a good move. I bought the 45mm PO for the novelty of having a large watch.

I would still choose sub over PO after owning both.

[Rashid.bk]

In some aspects, yes. Across the board, no. In the case of the PO and Sub, I wouldn't say head shoulders at all.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[Mystro]

The Omega lume also blows away Rolex and just about anything else in its class. There is no reason Rolex can't produce a similar lume if they would make a effort.

Note the reflection of the lume off the counter and that's just a 2 second exposure.

[Shaver]

Does anyone know what is the weight differance between the PO 2500 & a SubC ?

[GradyPhilpott]

I almost bought the Pacific Ocean once, but I got a much better deal on the Brooklyn Bridge.

It's not a waste if you like both.

As Larry says, why wear the same watch every day when you can mix it up a bit.

Go for it!

[codecow]

Originally Posted by seabreeze

May I ask the age and model number of yours. It's quite nice





The question is really is it a huge redundant waste to have have both

I have a Submariner Hulk, Seamaster GMT, and a Seamaster. I wear all of them, so no it's not a waste.