Rolex vs omega quality

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by duquephart

Ahem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTVBp_1Ddxw&t=63s

Agreed. Under enough magnification any mass produced products will show plenty of imperfections. Mind you some of them wouldn't require a lot. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Oyster Perp]

The "316 v 904" argument continues. 316L is considered "surgical" quality and is not just used for knives and forks, the 904L is a harder compound and has a greater 'shine' capability, but for what the majority of us need its a moot point. Rolex are not the only watch manufacturer to use 904L. Isnt the Omega Proplof 904L ?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Oyster Perp

The "316 v 904" argument continues. 316L is considered "surgical" quality and is not just used for knives and forks, the 904L is a harder compound and has a greater 'shine' capability, but for what the majority of us need its a moot point. Rolex are not the only watch manufacturer to use 904L. Isnt the Omega Proplof 904L ?

Agree but there are many myths on the net about the special 904L steel now called Oystersteel mainly by those who only look through Rolex blinkered glasses, and yes 316L its a surgical grade steel, AND THE STEEL USED IN THINGS LIKE KNIVES AND FORKS IS MOSTLY A MUCH LOWER GRADE SS. First Rolex do not manufacture their own steel its got from a third party in billets,and there is nothing magical about 904L or Oystersteel today. Most of the watch industry like say Patek, Omega, and Tudor mainly use 316L .It was mainly a brag factor and marketing by Rolex as they were once the only watch manufacturer using it, so now called oystersteel to make it sound more exclusive. Today several other companies use 904L SS in watches XOSKELETON for one and Girard-Perregaux .But in the real world 904L steel was not developed by any watch brand, it was developed to be used in high salt/acid factories like for instance vinegar pickling factories, and factories that use high acid products etc. And the only difference between 904L and 316L is simply this, the main difference between 316L over 904L it has slightly more Molybdenum(Mo)approx 2% more, approx 1-2% more Crome(Cr), 1% copper(Cu), and approx 10% more nickel and that's it all quite cheap commodities. And today far more 316L is sold than 904L, now if it was the other way round 904L would be cheaper than 316L.There are a few disadvantages to 904L it will scratch and show scratches more easily than 316L.The only advantage is, it's a bit more corrosion resistant, but in the real world with today's pampered watches it's doubtful if any real advantage over the industry norm 316L.And the internet myth that 904L is harder than 316L its not true, its how the metal is finally tempered defines its overall hardness, so 316L can be harder than 904L.

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by Oyster Perp

Isnt the Omega Proplof 904L ?

No, the original and the first version of the reissue were 316L, and the current reissue version is grade 5 titanium (although the bracelet is grade 2 ti).

[Andad]

It is possible that Omega would be superior to Rolex on TOF.

I have noticed a reference to a LEC.

Note that the crown referred to is not an etching?

[Marcjvr]

Threads like this put me off Rolex.

“My watch is superior to your junk watch”…ugh

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by Marcjvr

Threads like this put me off Rolex.

“My watch is superior to your junk watch”…ugh

Agreed. Enjoy YOUR watch and leave others to enjoy theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by Marcjvr

Threads like this put me off Rolex.

“My watch is superior to your junk watch”…ugh

Yes, but it’s sadly what happens when people blindly believe the marketing spin and hype without actually spending any time learning about watches in general.

[APPRF]

I own several Rolexes and Omegas. Omega Speedmaster has better movement and history than the Daytona, and I'm talking about the new Speedmaster 3861, the 321 blows the Daytona out of the water. Rolex Sub is definitely better than any Omega diver, you cannot talk about all Omega models vs all Rolex models, and make a fair comparison that way. Some here always talk about value retention with Rolex versus Omega forgetting that Omega has several models that hold value at a minimum or even go 2x 3x retail like Snoopies, Alaska, Tin Tin, 50th Anniversary models, 321, etc. Most Rolex models didn't hold value 4-5 years ago. It's all marketing, and who plays it better wins. Omega is learning from Rolex marketing, and supply restriction ways, and people who like Omega and are hesitating about value retention will regret it soon. Also what's the deal with Rolex boxes it's getting ridiculous.

[warrior]

The general respect ( of course there are exceptions) given to Omega in this thread on a ROLEX! forum….tells you all you need to know. No doubt Rolex has more prestige for the masses but on a pure quality level, the difference isn’t much. Each brand has their strengths and I’d say that most watch enthusiasts know.

[Mystro]

Oh yes, the timeless “Rolex vs Omega”. We have been having these on TRF for as long as the forum started. The older threads got a lot more heated and insulting to both camps. No one wins these threads and they eventually burn themself out with the general consensus of Omega=value Rolex=prestige.

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Oh yes, the timeless “Rolex vs Omega”. We have been having these on TRF for as long as the forum started. The older threads got a lot more heated and insulting to both camps. No one wins these threads and they eventually burn themself out with the general consensus of Omega=value Rolex=prestige.

I just read this whole thread and found it pretty interesting and informative, and relatively civilized for TRF. It sure beats 90% of the other threads on here these days that generally touch on 2 or 3 of the same old subjects.

[NoVaSubowner]

The Rolex Forums... Land of the fanboys.

Do any of you honestly believe there is a difference in quality between the current generation of Omegas and Rolex???

It's going to shock the Rolex acolytes on this forum but there was a time in history when Omega was considered the superior watch to Rolex... Horrifying, I know.....

The dip in status probably took place in the late 60's -70's when Omega became schizoid in their designs instead of sticking with a consistent product line. Something they are starting to finally do again.

Don't seriously tell me that there is a disparity between say the latest generation SMP and a Submariner, other then retail price. Because after owning both I can safely say there is none.

[Posh Gentleman]

Originally Posted by NoVaSubowner

The Rolex Forums... Land of the fanboys.

Do any of you honestly believe there is a difference in quality between the current generation of Omegas and Rolex???

It's going to shock the Rolex acolytes on this forum but there was a time in history when Omega was considered the superior watch to Rolex... Horrifying, I know.....

The dip in status probably took place in the late 60's -70's when Omega became schizoid in their designs instead of sticking with a consistent product line. Something they are starting to finally do again.

Don't seriously tell me that there is a disparity between say the latest generation SMP and a Submariner, other then retail price. Because after owning both I can safely say there is none.

luxury goods are priced based on desirability, demand, and supply.

can anyone reason why certain paintings from Picasso sells for $50-100 million bucks? that's right. extreme scarcity and huge demand.

I am no rolex fanboy. however, in my opinion rolex is far more desirable than anything omega, primarily due to case sizing and the design of the watch. more so than "quality".

to my eyes, Omega seamaster is the ugliest SS swiss watch right after Breitling navitimer. I wouldn't wear it if it is given to me for free, as I think it is a monstrosity.

if omega makes rolex-like beauties with comparable quality at $3-5k price points, let me know. I will sign up for that.

[cvo]

Omega quality is fine, they just come out with too many models/variants. That waters down their branding.

[VogelPhoenix]

Originally Posted by Posh Gentleman

I am no rolex fanboy. however, in my opinion rolex is far more desirable than anything omega, primarily due to case sizing and the design of the watch.

I would not trade my 321 for any current production SS Rolex.

[Wrist Watcher]

Originally Posted by NoVaSubowner

The Rolex Forums... Land of the fanboys.

Do any of you honestly believe there is a difference in quality between the current generation of Omegas and Rolex???

It's going to shock the Rolex acolytes on this forum but there was a time in history when Omega was considered the superior watch to Rolex... Horrifying, I know.....

The dip in status probably took place in the late 60's -70's when Omega became schizoid in their designs instead of sticking with a consistent product line. Something they are starting to finally do again.

Don't seriously tell me that there is a disparity between say the latest generation SMP and a Submariner, other then retail price. Because after owning both I can safely say there is none.

I currently own the Submariner and the latest SMP, and the Sub in my opinion is noticeably better in three areas: (1) the bezel action (easier to grip and sounds and feels better), (2) the bracelet (prefer the taper, looks, and feel of the oyster), and (3) the thickness of the case (the Sub is thinner). Now, does that mean the Sub is a $5K+ better watch? That is for the consumer to decide. I love them both.

[rlj676]

Why does everyone compare sub to sea master? The Planet Ocean is much closer in price and gives up nothing in quality in my opinion. The fact it can be had on a first class deployment strap is a plus.

The big negatives aren’t quality related to me, being sized and color (why so much orange!)

[NoVaSubowner]

Originally Posted by Wrist Watcher

I currently own the Submariner and the latest SMP, and the Sub in my opinion is noticeably better in three areas: (1) the bezel action (easier to grip and sounds and feels better), (2) the bracelet (prefer the taper, looks, and feel of the oyster), and (3) the thickness of the case (the Sub is thinner). Now, does that mean the Sub is a $5K+ better watch? That is for the consumer to decide. I love them both.

Fair response compared to some of the other Napalm attacks here.

I happen to agree, especially with the last sentence. But; I’m not sure the 5k differential is accurate anymore since Subs, and any sport model Rolex, are next to impossible to get from a retailer. Then the difference is closer to 8-9k on the gray market.

As a watch on its own merits, is a Sub worth 9k more than a Seamaster? I’m still not sure....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeAZ]

I think there is an important distinction between "quality" versus "design".

In terms of quality, Omega is close to Rolex, though the Omega bracelets are generally lagging. The quality and comfort of a Rolex bracelet is unbeatable in the 5,000 to 15,000 USD price category.

In terms of design, that is a matter of personal taste but frankly nothing in the modern Omega catalog resonates with me. The speedmaster comes close, but no cigar due to the bracelet. The remaining Omega offerings all have awkward hands (e.g. diver skeleton hands, PO big arrows, AT minute arrow hand and seconds strange isoceles triangle), unsightly helium escape valves, or hour markers that just don't float my boat (e.g. PO with the 12/6/9 markers, AT triangular hour markers, and Tresor with those weird elongated roman numerals). Probably their nicest watch is the Constellation Globemaster, and that's no surprise since it looks awfully similar to a Datejust. In fact, I think the nicest Omegas I've seen are their vintage models, and vintage constellation Omega is a beautiful watch. Maybe that is why they were historically a stronger competitor in the market.

What I respect about Rolex is that they produce fine pieces that exude class. Their designs are tasteful and superior to Omega. Rolex refines their design language over the years and maintain unified themes in their offerings.

Meanwhile, Omega is still releasing watches that honestly show questionable decision making in the realm of design and aesthetic... may I present to you, exhibit A, the Olympic Diver. The fact that this watch exists is an egregious sin.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by NoVaSubowner

The Rolex Forums... Land of the fanboys.

Do any of you honestly believe there is a difference in quality between the current generation of Omegas and Rolex???
.

Yes, Rolex is better.

I’m a huge Omega fan. I love Omega watches, but Rolex is better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mystro]

Omega is their worst enemy with way too many watches watering down their own core lines and then there is the not so "limited editions" as well huge AD discounts. What this does is keep the preowned market very low and in turn gives a great watch at a unbeatable used price point. The Snoopy watches are a dip into the Rolex territory of retained value which will be interesting if Omega tries to do this successfully with other truly limited models.

[GeekCred]

I think the Rolex clasps have no peer still, but the links on the Planet Ocean are very impressive; just as good if not better IMHO.

[asiparks]

Knowing that the $400 fake Rolex are also made from 904 makes the steel just a little less special.

[Snilsson]

I like Omega, I've owned a vintage Seamaster and two different Aqua Terra's.
With that said I don't think they hold a candle to Rolex, bracelet is not on the same level, design albeit nice is a bit more generic honestly and movements feel cheaper when winding and messing around with them.
I've had reliability issues with Omega too, never had a problem with Rolex on the other hand.

[ChipotleBanana]

Originally Posted by asiparks

Knowing that the $400 fake Rolex are also made from 904 makes the steel just a little less special.

I will bet you $1,000 no replica is made of 904L since no other brand has done so.

[logo]

Originally Posted by ChipotleBanana

I will bet you $1,000 no replica is made of 904L since no other brand has done so.

Where can I collect my $1,000?

https://shop.ballwatch.ch/en/Icebreaker-PM3030C-S-BK

[kieselguhr]

Originally Posted by ChipotleBanana

I will bet you $1,000 no replica is made of 904L since no other brand has done so.

Forget Ball, or GP, or Seiko (JDM). Even micro brands use 904L

https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/o...emium-904.html

I won’t be mentioning his statement as it’s against forum rules, but they are definitely out there.

You going to pay him that $1000?

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by ChipotleBanana

I will bet you $1,000 no replica is made of 904L since no other brand has done so.

There's a few out there. Even Steinhart are making a 904L watch these days, and selling it for a mere £770 - https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/d...emium-904.html

[asiparks]

Originally Posted by ChipotleBanana

I will bet you $1,000 no replica is made of 904L since no other brand has done so.

You are very wrong. I'll take my $1000 in cash please.

I'll pm you