Rolex vs omega quality

[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!)

[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.

[Chambers]

Originally Posted by escobar144

I wouldnt say that Omega in general is worst than Rolex. The new Seamasters are built very well. You could truly buy a Seamaster and make it a one and done. Now this is coming from a Speedmaster fan. But I dont think you could compare the quality of a Speedmaster to anything From the rolex line. Speedmaster bracelets cheap (especially the new ones). And it makes it hard to justify paying retail. However, that is the charm to the Speedy. Great history. But not worth 6k.

I agree with this guy.

[BLNR Nairobi]

Originally Posted by 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!)

I’ve always seen it as Submariner=Sea Master and Sea Dweller=Planet Ocean.

[Saoirse32]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Agreed for Planet Ocean varieties. Seamaster 300m Professional Divers... Not really.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

You are correct, but since I was replying to that particular post, I think the picture was of a newer PO, which are, in fact, extremely thick...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rlj676]

Originally Posted by BLNR Nairobi

I’ve always seen it as Submariner=Sea Master and Sea Dweller=Planet Ocean.

I look at it as you get Seadweller performance for sub money lol.

I just think the PO quality is on par, and you get more features/depth.

I also don’t care for 904, it scratches way easier than the 316 I had on my omega.

I say all of this with current collection of blnr, DJ41 and just picked up a black Daytona sat lol.

[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.

[cvo]

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

[Boaters]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

The Rolex uses 904L steel, I suppose I could look it up but just off my memory Omega uses a lesser-grade steel, I think it’s the same as Tudor(?) 215?

This is all un-researched, just from a conversation I had at the AD a while ago. If someone knows better please correct me.

The 904L stainless is almost one third of nickel very nice feel on the wrist IMPO
https://www.sandmeyersteel.com/image...-SpecSheet.pdf

[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

[NoVaSubowner]

Originally Posted by cvo

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

Which is exactly why they will never catch up in the public with Rolex. Despite being as good a watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[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.

[RampageWatch]

Originally Posted by tquieng

I recently went to an AD of Omega and held the new moon watch- It feels like a piece of junk compaired to Rolex metal. I have the prior version and the band feels like an expensive band but this newer one, the band feels.like a cheap Seiko band. Is it me or you guys feel the same.

Agree, completely, I was pretty disapointed with it. Rolex and Tudor BBay feels better


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[asiparks]

Originally Posted by VogelPhoenix

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

^ this ^

The 321 is a movement of practical beauty, the Speedy surrounding it is gorgeous

[hambone1983]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

Yes Rolex uses 904L steel which is considered as ultimate.

Omega uses 316L steel which is for forks and spoons, not a precious luxury steel..

I think they use 304 for cutlery. But your point stands, 316L has much lower corrosion resistance

[Bizcut1]

Loving breaking free from the AD bullsh*t games...

[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

[BLACKHORSE 6]

Originally Posted by 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.

Agree with this. The Speedmaster is the only Omega that ever really spoke to me, and I still have one. Everything else has something off design wise, IMHO. I’ve tried on the Planet Ocean and the SMP, but they all seem chunky on my wrist due to the height. I would have bought at Speedmaster 9300 but for that very reason.

[csaltphoto]

Originally Posted by 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.

Basically this. Back when there were actually Rolexes in AD's the experience was going into a BMW/Porsche dealership, a store that offers high end furniture from a single brand, etc. Even though there was a variety of models they all clearly came from the same DNA. The designs are refined and mostly understated; classy and timeless. The execution is terrific.

When I've visited an Omega AD the experience seems... Chaotic at best. TOOOOO many choices that often seem random in terms of design. More like going to used car lot or department store.

[stewester]

I remember seeing Rolex vs. Omega debate threads regularly 5-6 years ago, but how relevant are they today now that the watches reside in completely different price brackets? The Sub is roughly 4x the price of Omega's closest equivalent, and a Daytona is roughly 6x(!) more expensive than a Speedmaster.

If Omega are getting anywhere remotely near the quality of Rolex given these price differentials they are doing very well indeed!

[jets]

Originally Posted by tquieng

I recently went to an AD of Omega and held the new moon watch- It feels like a piece of junk compaired to Rolex metal. I have the prior version and the band feels like an expensive band but this newer one, the band feels.like a cheap Seiko band. Is it me or you guys feel the same.

You missed the whole point of the moonwatch.

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by csaltphoto

Basically this. Back when there were actually Rolexes in AD's the experience was going into a BMW/Porsche dealership, a store that offers high end furniture from a single brand, etc. Even though there was a variety of models they all clearly came from the same DNA. The designs are refined and mostly understated; classy and timeless. The execution is terrific.

When I've visited an Omega AD the experience seems... Chaotic at best. TOOOOO many choices that often seem random in terms of design. More like going to used car lot or department store.

Perhaps it seems a lot of choices because there's nothing to look at but empty display cabinets in the Rolex AD. But if they had all their models in the shop they'd be over 150 variations of the Datejust alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[ThatOtherGuy7]

I like Omega’s Seamaster/Planet Ocean lines. Was looking at their 007 50th Anniversary edition and it was something like $48K! They make good stuff. Also a fan of JLC but they are more dressy for my age and taste at the moment. High quality watches from JLC for sure.

[cgaites]

Don't want to get too into Rolex vs. Omega as I own and love the watches from both brands. In my eyes there is very, very little between them in terms of build quality. Rolex has certainly done a better job in maintain adherence to a recognizable brand design language, and therefore has built significantly more brand equity with say the Submariner then Omega has with its Seamaster. I think that is the big reason the Speedmaster Pro is the one Omega that seems to be mostly accepted by Rolex aficionados. It's really the only watch in the Omega catalog that has followed Rolex's highly conservative product development model. It's therefore no coincidence that it is one watch where Omega can successfully pull off the Rolex "artificial scarcity" model (see 321 and Snoopy variations).

Enough about that though. I want to talk bracelets. I absolutely abhor the idea that when it comes to bracelets heavy = quality. The bracelet on the 1861 Speedy Pro was terrible (I've owned several). The end links jut out way to far past the case, micro-adjustability was poor, comfort was mediocre. However, it was heavy. The new bracelet is worlds better. More comfortable, more adjustable, and doesn't make the watch wear 2mm bigger than it is. However, it is light. This is what the Speedy faithful asked for - a lighter, more vintage feeling bracelet. It is what Omega delivered. I love it.

For the record, my all time favorite bracelet is the oyster bracelet on my 14720 Explorer. Love it because its supper light and comfortable with its hollow end and center links. Wish more manufactures would go back to light and comfortable vs. "substantial".

OK, end rant.

[LFFL]

The oyster bracelet on my 14060M feels a bit flimsy and cheap which is the reason why i'd like to add the sub41 since it feels much more robust. Though never had any experience with Omega-- just here to soak up some knowledge

[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.

[Jack T]

I have a 10 year old Planet Ocean with the 2500d movement, accurate as ever, the bracelet is solid and secure, the case and finish look almost as good as when new. It’s a bit thick, yes, but functionally it’s everything a Rolex can be, and aesthetically it has more visual appeal to me.