GMT watch wanted - is the obvious answer the right one?

[sweets]

So, I am looking to get a GMT watch, and I like what I would call real GMT, with the local time set in hour increments without hacking the watch.
I like lume, I like a (rotating) bezel, I like the date.

For me this is contemplating my largest watch purchase by a cost factor of 2, and this is outside my original buying comfort zone. I will have to sell a few valued pieces to afford one of these options. So I want to get it right. But which one?

So, the clear (and original) answer is to buy a Rolex GMT II. But there are 2 other makers that offer a "true" GMT movement, Seiko and Omega.
I would intend to wear whatever I get on straps as opposed to bracelets, just like I do with every other watch I have.

Option 1 - Rolex
And of all of them, I would select the near 2000 transitional 16710. Old case, drilled lugs, SELs and real lume, not dying trit. My choice would be a Coke bezel.
But, prices have been on the march for these for a while, and although Rolex is the first name on the team sheet, I am not entirely sure this is the best option for me.
I would reckon on about £5k for a good one from private sale, more from a dealer.
The sub-style case looks great on any strap, it is a convenient size and inherently great. The GMTII is a classic, I know.

Option 2 - Seiko
The Grand Seiko SBGE001 is the selected option from this manufacturer. About the only GS GMT that offers a rotating bezel, and lumed hands. It too has a signature case design, that of the MM300, but elevated beyond toolness. There is so much more going on here than the Rolex, for the money, with facets on the hands, textures on the indices, increased WR. It is also significantly cheaper than the 16710, I can certainly get one for under £4k over here in the UK, tax paid. New or very close to it. If it did not have the power reserve indicator, this would be a more attractive watch (imho), but that is not a deal breaker for me. I could grow to love it.

Option 3 - Omega
It strikes me that the Omega Planet Ocean 600m GMT is also a very credible option. Again, lots more WR, and even a display back option. Much better lume. Titanium too if I want. Choice of dial colours.
And comfortably less money than either of the above, there are quite a few on Chrono24 for £3500 or so, new in the EU.
With their gloss dials, applied indices and broadarrow hands Omega really is raising its game with these.

Option 4 - Other
I may well have missed a suitable contender, but am not convinced. I have looked a the new Breitling Avenger GMT's, but they are simple GMT, and it just looked too, err, shiny.

What do you think, I am genuinely interested.??
Dave

[Yunsung]

You are clearly interested, based on your comments you have given it some thought, and I agree with most of them as I am also on the hunt for a GMT.

One thing I would say about the Omega are that they are very tall, just look at some photos online and see for yourself. Add to that fact it's 43.5mm it's too big for me. Please consider the older sword hand GMT and also the 2535.80 which is the blue bond style SMP but with added GMT function - this is the one o have my heart set on but my WTB has been unsuccessful so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JP Chestnut]

I have the gmt2 that you're talking about and I love it. I'd probably just pay the price and get what you want. With that said, prices are crazy. I got mine when nobody wanted one of these.

[Man of Kent]

You don't specify if mechanical movement is a requirement, because if not, Seiko and Citizen both do solar powered true GMT watches. Cheap compared to your options and being quartz, more accurate to boot.

[Qatar-wol]

Going against the flow here, I voted for the GS. I've recently picked one up for the second time, and I lvoe it for the reasons you listed - it's 200WR, it's luminous (not so common with the GS models). It has a luminous, rotating bezel, and it's a good size, a good presence. I love it. I certainly prefer it to my older Explorer II.

[Saint-Just]

GS is disqualified because of the ugly, useless RdM that unbalances the dial of what would be a cracking watch without it.

[ryanb741]

I have owned all 3 of the options. For me the Omega (latest version) is in a different league quality wise. This watch now makes the others redundant in my rotation




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dave+63]

There's really only one contender for me. It looks good on an oyster, a jubilee, rubber or leather. You can swap the bezel insert between coke, Pepsi or black and the probability is it'll be worth more than you paid in twelve months time.

I paid £3500 for my 1999, Swiss dial coke about three years ago. It's the cheapest watch I've ever owned (in that it's probably the only one which has increased in value).

[submorstua]

...I like what I would call real GMT, with the local time set in hour increments without hacking the watch.

Sorry for my naivety, but what do you mean by set in hour increments? Do you mean the crown can rotate the hour hand in isolation?

[Saint-Just]

That is indeed what I would expect from a real GMT

[Qatar-wol]

Exactly that. The hour hand can be advanced or set back in one-hour steps without hacking the watch. Very useful if you travel across time zones with any frequency.

This is the preferred GMT function of all right-thinking, good looking virile people, and far superior to so-called GMT watches where the 24-Hr hand is the one that steps. But the Traveller's GMT far rarer than the 'office-GMT' version. In auto, I can only really think of Omega, Rolex and Seiko that manage the superior Traveller's GMT. (Maybe some of the newer Breitling in-house? IDK.)

[zelig]

Exactly that. The hour hand can be advanced or set back in one-hour steps without hacking the watch. Very useful if you travel across time zones with any frequency.

This is the preferred GMT function of all right-thinking, good looking virile people, and far superior to so-called GMT watches where the 24-Hr hand is the one that steps. But the Traveller's GMT far rarer than the 'office-GMT' version. In auto, I can only really think of Omega, Rolex and Seiko that manage the superior Traveller's GMT. (Maybe some of the newer Breitling in-house? IDK.)

Remember this (traveller's GMT)... ?





z

[Qatar-wol]

z

I always miss one! Do IWC still make a proper traveller's GMT? I think the world timer counts, but it's a funny fish....

Should have remembered the TZC - I think I've had about three of them!

[drury]

I'd vote Omega -- If it suits you that is. Yes, it's tall, but also quite striking

[Omegamanic]

The Rolex is the only sensible long term prospect.

I seriously believe that Omega will make slimmer cases in future, and we well look back on these thick case years with some fondness, but still enjoy other watches. Plus some of their designs are a dog's dinner compared to the classic Rolex GMT. A new one won't hold its value either.

The Seiko is nice enough, but is missing something for me as an only one really expensive watch. If you owned a few other watches in the same general price range then I'd say give it a try, but it could be an expensive lesson.

[proby24]

I have the GS (the limited edition Asia model- blue dial/yellow GMT hand) and it is an absolutely fantastic watch. The lume configuration alone makes this the coolest 'night' watch I have. It is just a tad too big for me so will be letting it go.

I bought a GMT 2 from around 2001 last year for a great price. This is probably now my favourite watch. A true classic. 40mm and thin it is super comfy and fits my wrist much better than the GS.

Rolex for me.

[MakeColdplayHistory]

The 'obvious one' for me is the one I've got...

[Saint-Just]

The 'obvious one' for me is the one I've got...

I had that one. Very, very good watch. I had chosen the rubber over the bracelet, but also wore it on an Italian mesh.

[helidoc]

It had to be the 16710. Prices are strong, and a good one is BLNR money. If you can do without a rotating bezel, the 16570 Exp II shares a lot with the GMT, but for an awful lot less, £3500-£4000 rather than £5500-6000

Just a thought

D


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[verv]

Rolex are the iconic GMT. All day long.
Panerai also do a true GMT movement though. In the 233 and others that I can't remember the ref of. Incremental hour hands.

But still, 16710.

[Dr Wolff]

I can't fault the Seiko GS quality, but to me they are a bit like Japanese cars & I have never been taken with them.
Modern Omegas, especially the POs or any of them with co-axial movements are far too thick & chunky - I just can't wear them.

Rolex all the way, and I particularly like the OP's choice

[sweets]

Wow, lots of reaction and answers.
Not surprisingly, the 16710 is running away with it, and I guess the answer in terms of value can generally be justified there, because the Rolex is marching upwards in value, whilst the others are dropping or staying.
I like the idea of an earlier Sword-handed GMT, that appeals, but the (admittedly great lume) printed dial seems lower rent than the applied indices of all the other candidates. This option is still firmly within my comfort zone, so thanks for pointing that out.
There are also some rarer Seiko alternatives too.
And I shall have to go try on a PO 600m GMT to see what the height/weight feels like.
Keep the thoughts coming though.
Dave

[mrushton]

Do you really need/use the bezel? I had a GMT Master and Explorer II and one had to go, the GMT. It didn't do anything different or better than the Explorer apart from the bezel which I never rotated. If I was buying a GMT it would be an older Coke or newer BLNR or the glorious TZC IWC. I love my Polar Explorer II.Ticks everything I want in a GMT.

[blackal]

I have a 1980 Rolex GMT, and love it...........

But - I think the Glycine Airman of the late '50s is so evocative of the era of the begining of trans-world air travel.

Glycine make a modern version - not quite the same, though............ In the same way that the new GMT isn't a patch on the original, classic design (rolex)

Al

[Itsguy]

+1 on the 16570 Explorer II. Obviously it's a matter of taste which style you prefer, but it's certainly a 'proper' GMT. The only difference being that the bezel of the GMT gives you three time zones in total, but I've never needed more than two personally, and you save anything up to £2k over the GMT. With which you can buy an Omega AT Quartz (now discontinued applied indices version) for places where you'd think twice about taking the Rolex, which has a 'proper' independent hour hand adjustment without hacking for travelling - you just don't have the home time.

[MrSmith]

Option 4 - Other
I may well have missed a suitable contender, but am not convinced. I have looked a the new Breitling Avenger GMT's, but they are simple GMT, and it just looked too, err, shiny.

What do you think, I am genuinely interested.??
Dave

a pre owned IWC UTC spitfire? either the version with 24hr at the top IWC3251 or the newer version with it at the bottom. black or silver. they have applied numerals unlike the older non spitfire version.
there is also the St Expury version IWC 325110

[aldfort]

I own the Omega Seamaster Coaxial GMT and the Rolex GMT.
Both excellent. Rolex gets more wrist time, it's a little more wearable and lighter and slimmer.

[JGJG]

An interesting question - and I very much enjoyed the insights and economy of the original post.

Reading between the lines, OP, I think you have sorta-kinda decided that, for you, the Rollie is the ür-GMT. If that's where your subconscious is at, then perhaps nothing else will give you satisfaction.

[sweets]

It is interesting isn't it, I have considered many options, including the Explorer II (Polar and black). I have never understood why a flimsy rotating bezel with printed numerals on an insert equates to over £1000 more compared to a fixed one with engraved numerals paint-filled on solid steel.
But, I porefer a bezel as I would use the bezel as a timer more than anything, to indicate a zero, rather than a third timezone.

Of course if I drop the bezel requirement, a lost of other Omegas and Seikos come into view. The Omega Aqua terra GMT with teak dial looks very nice, and used Speedmasters like the Solar Impulse look very affordable (why??) but I am set on a bezel.

I do very much think the Rolex is the go-to GMT, but I have 2 very nice Tudor Subs, so I have a quota of Rolex sports casework, size and fit.

Hence wanting to consider other options.
D

[ryanb741]

Seriously though, do check out the brand new model Omega Planet Ocean GMT (the one in my pic with the black and white bezel). My pic is awful and makes it look cheap - in the metal it is absolutely gorgeous, superbly made and frankly is just about the nicest watch I have owned. The case shape is tall but because of the changes Omega have made to the lug angle on the 2017 watches it sits perfectly on the wrist. The finishing is beautiful, lovely ceramic bezel and dial. My BLNR doesn't even come close when it comes to quality of construction and whilst I know there's more to a watch than that and most people would go for the BLNR because they have been conditioned to by hanging around on watch forums the fact of the matter is that Omega have brought out a real show stopper and that is the best GMT you can buy for under £7k.

I do of course expect comments to the contrary, the usual 'let's see how the co-ax movement holds up in 10 years' and 'rock solid residuals' stuff that gets regurgitated frequently but frankly unless you are coming from my perspective of actually owning both watches and being able to make a direct comparison then sadly it's just going to be hot air and conjecture.

This Omega feels almost like they collaborated with Grand Seiko to make it - wonderful detailing, superb finishing and slightly avant garde. As you can see I'm quite smitten with it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Qatar-wol]

While I voted GS in the poll (and stand by my decision!) I've been wearing this Explorer II for the last few days.



And it reminds me daily that it's a great watch, and currently the value watch of the SS Rolex sports line-up! On a NATO, in particular, it's a great low-profile every day traveller's watch.

[Ozzie]

Why not get GMT Master 16700? I've got one and love it. Only difference is you can't move the hour hand independently.

[Scott]

While I voted GS in the poll (and stand by my decision!) I've been wearing this Explorer II for the last few days.



And it reminds me daily that it's a great watch, and currently the value watch of the SS Rolex sports line-up! On a NATO, in particular, it's a great low-profile every day traveller's watch.

So good I bought it twice.

[Eamon]

if you can live without the bezel, I prefer the GS hi beat GMT

If true GMT is not required, there are also some nice 'world timer' options

[thenikjones]

Blancpain do true GMT, the one from the 2000s with. Yacht-master style bezel always caught my eye. Doesn't hack AFAIK

I have the printed dial Omega and the printing is part of the appeal.

[Captain Morgan]

I've always had a soft spot for the financial Girard Perregaux ww.tc

[Evangelos]

I would have to vote for the 'other' option since I very like the 'JLC master geographic' and the 'JLC Master Control World Geographic'.

these aren't that sporty anyways but I vote based on my criteria. If I wanted something more sporty though I would probably go for the Rolex ExpII 16570

[sfl1979]

How about this one?

[MarkO]

There is another GS option - these come in white dial or black dial but there was a LE in blue.





I have tried on the white face version and it is very nice but may fall short on the lume requirements

[Eamon]

if you can live without the bezel, I prefer the GS hi beat GMT
...
If true GMT is not required, there are also some nice 'world timer' options
...

but based on your OP I voted 16710.
It's the classic GMT
It's the one that most appears to meet your requirements.
It's probably the one that will cost you less if you move it on (although will cost you more initially).

[wileeeeeey]

I would go for the Coke. If you change your mind resell is there to get the GS.

[Robbyman]

How about these two?

[bubi]

[S Works]

Have you considered the Sinn UTC range? My 857 is probably the watch in my collection that gets most wrist time. It's been all around the world with me, is less blingy than most GMT's by other manufacturers (which I like in places where I don't want a big shiny "look at me" watch on), and is super-tough. The bracelet with micro-adjust etc is one of the most comfortable I've ever worn.



That said, I too hanker for a Rolex GMT II. I keep missing the good ones on SC!