Submariner vs Seamaster

[R G]

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

Then please enlighten us O Great Wisdom :

He has. Just read...

[Mr.Rolex1]

I prefer Rolex

[Mystro]

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.
Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???

I like this.

[R G]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.
Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???

Brilliant.

Nothing more to say here guys.

[LuminousMaximus]

I’m going to go dig up my old sword-hands, and an 18kt Omega thanks to this thread

I think it would be cool if ROLEX bought Omega from it parent co...

[marcusp23]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.
Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???

Well....just for that, you’re gonna have to turn in your CHNR :)

[AJMarcus]

[QUOTE=Mystro;9930417]Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.
Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???[/QUOTE

Clearly you don’t think much of Rolex. That’s your prerogative. But why buy the CHRN

[shaunylw]

[QUOTE=AJMarcus;9930508]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.

I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.

The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.

As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.

Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???[/QUOTE



Clearly you don’t think much of Rolex. That’s your prerogative. But why buy the CHRN

Makes a lot of sense! I love both, wearing a 2254.50 right now, which i think might be the best dive watch made period. It sits low on the wrist, has a fantastic bracelet, and outside of the helium valve looks amazing. Omega is no slouch, i look forward to buying more!

The one thing Omega doesn’t do well, IMO, is their case sizing. The co-axial is 44mm, way too big. It’s one of the best looking Chronos made but the size kills it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sillo]

[QUOTE=shaunylw;9930568]

Originally Posted by AJMarcus

I love both, wearing a 2254.50 right now, which i think might be the best dive watch made period. It sits low on the wrist, has a fantastic bracelet, and outside of the helium valve looks amazing. Omega is no slouch, i look forward to buying more!

It is an awesome watch and relatively cheap when compared to a sub from the same era. Omega also isn't stingy with their parts and a quick call to an omega boutique and you can get the micro adjust clasp to make it even better. The only thing keeping it from being absolutely perfect is the HEV.

[sillo]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.
Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???

Stop, you're making too much sense.

[rkim11]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Own both. In fact 30 years of Rolex ownership and 15 years of Omega ownership.
I think the new Omega Master Chronometer METAS crushes Rolex in their movements. I didn’t know how much better their movements were until recently owning one of their new METAS certified movements and actually testing it. I have ran a lot of the latest Rolex movements through accuracy and Power Reserve tests but none can touch the Omega Cal. 9900 movement in performance.
The new Rolex 3285 is good and just now using industry standards of ceramic rotor bearings but the Omega 9900 is on another level of excellence in construction and end performance. It’s practically antimagnetic.
As far as build quality, it is a equal draw but actual materials used is where Omega clearly wins. Look at a Rolex dial under a loupe and then a Omega ceramic dial. Rolex dial is sloppy and printing is slightly foggy by comparison. A gloss ceramic dial has to be perfect as any imperfection is magnified significantly. Omega is clearly working to make the best watch possible pushing technical advancements where Rolex is coasting on their reputation and their movements are just keeping up to the industry standards. Rolex brilliance is in their business strategy making the most money for them. Omega is making the better watch but at the cost of releasing a higher variety of collections that water down their brand. I own both and have a lot respect for both brands. The arrogance of some Rolex owners toward Omega is embarrassing and unnecessary. The smugness is major baggage to the Rolex brand many enthusiast wont deal with anymore. My guess is the illusion of harder to get makes it a better product somehow to some people??? Not sure the seasoned enthusiast believes it or is even in Rolex targeted demographic.
Omega has been around a lot longer than Rolex and with some amazing achievements. The horological historical time line gets lost with talk of stickers and polishing I guess???

Brilliant

[Chewbacca]

Ugh. All watch forums have had this Sub vs SMP discussion.

It always ends with get a Seiko Sumo SPB077J1.

[nighthawk77]

Both are great watches in their own rights, but for me, SMP wins on value, movement and availability. Plus you don't need to play any games to actually own one of these.

Rolex wins in terms of brand recognition, value retention and desirability.

Design is subjective - imo SMP is a great looking modern diver and the Submariner is a timeless classic. Build quality and functionality are also up for debate with each having pros and cons.

I own the previous version SMP and I think it's great. I'm also on a 'waitlist' for a Submariner, but plan on keeping the Omega in the collection once I have the Sub.

[LigerBelair]

Aesthetics matters to me perhaps more than most and in terms of aesthetics I find the SMP to be absolutely hideous (the wart, the waves, the hands, the bracelet) while the Sub is classically attractive. It's not a close call imo. I go with the Sub everytime.

[eltonbalch]

Surprised no one has mentioned this Seamaster. No He valve, no wave dial, great bracelet and (at current street prices) about 1/3 the cost of the Rolex Sub. Trust me, the Sub just isn’t three times better than this Seamaster...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[AJMarcus]

Originally Posted by eltonbalch

Surprised no one has mentioned this Seamaster. No He valve, no wave dial, great bracelet and (at current street prices) about 1/3 the cost of the Rolex Sub. Trust me, the Sub just isn’t three times better than this Seamaster...Attachment 1066418


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The 300 MC is the true Seamaster heir. It’s a fine piece.

[joyfultrade]

Omega is a nice watch still!!

[Gprotein]

Own and love both. Neither is perfect and like all things in life, they have pros along with cons. I can’t see myself letting either one go

[ilyknarf]

A Rolex is a Rolex! I waited so many years to finally get my first sub and kept contemplating on buying a cheaper alternative. I am glad I finally waited as it feels so much more special.

[jeffgo888]

I had 2 seamasters , the blue and black dials before the sub....and I loved the blue dial...but once I got the sub, I never looked back and sold both of them seamasters.
Thought about getting another one last weeek but then said no.

[Scott Cali]

My Seamaster was my first luxury watch bought brand new in 1997, it's been a great watch with no issues....picked up my new Sub Date at the end of June...Rolex gets my vote...It's as close to a perfect watch that there is....the Omega now resides in my box, I do see a speedy in my future.

[Clinton Ave]

The lugs vs. bracelet on the six digit subs are god awful.

[avalvo]

The newest SMPs are awesome values. You get a phenomenal movement, a very high grade of movement, an adjustable clasp, ceramic face, bezel and inlays. And, one of the most comfortable bracelets out there. The watches look great on the metal bracelet or rubber and have a nice presence to them either way.

All for about $4.2k, after a dealer discount. That is way better than the current Sub. In fact for the price of a Sub you can get the SMP and a Grand Seiko Gmt quartz, also a great watch.

Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk

[Jamie1111]

lol, screw down helium valve on the other side of the case.........

[shaunylw]

Originally Posted by Jamie1111

lol, screw down helium valve on the other side of the case.........

It’s literally the dumbest decision they could ever make. Without it would be better for 99.9% of the people wearing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cannawatch]

Choose the watch that makes you smile every time you look at it!

[Jefferyasher]

I purchased a Seamaster in 2004 and returned it within 3 days to get my 14060m. Have NEVER regretted the decision.

[brandog]

I've owned both Rolex and Omega and Omega will never dethrone Rolex.

Everyone in the world knows what a Rolex is and its been that way for 70 years. Omega makes a great watch, and their movements are impressive, but the Rolex Submariner is and will always be the most iconic watch in the world. Omega can update their calibers every 2 years and offer 100 different colorful strap options for their watches but they will always be in Rolex's shadow.

[bgolfo]

Both are great watches you cannot go wrong. I would say if your able to get a sub go with the sub!