Reply With QuoteOh I'm not talking comfort wise or build I'm talking straight aesthetics. To my eye it's hiddeous and ruins the watch.Originally Posted by JeremyO
Michael - you may want to check this tube video out which gives a direct comparison. For me, the new style Rolex sport watch cases (with a few exceptions) have ruined them - with the introduction of the 'box shoulders' - I have sold both BLNR and Hulk because of this - to the detriment of my bank balance in hind site. I have the two tone new SMPc (SM300 whatever it is called these days) and it will be staying.
https://youtu.be/2GqugEUDBEM?t=1928
Oh I'm not talking comfort wise or build I'm talking straight aesthetics. To my eye it's hiddeous and ruins the watch.
Had a few in stock in T3 tonight so I took a look with the wife. I really like it on the rubber strap but like the sales guy say, you pay £60 more and get it on the bracelet. Quality looked good and is refreshingly different. Like the rose gold and black dial combo... which was £4K tax free.... what discount can you exp cr buying from high street? Less than dutt free?
As a Sea-Dweller owner with no interest in a Sub, the new Seamaster with the new micro adjustable clasp and the possibility of a good discount looks a great buy to me.
Each to his own. I think they look great.
Last edited by JeremyO; 4th January 2019 at 18:36.
https://youtu.be/A9vhi5-dZSQ
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Have to say the black is a looker - think I may prefer it over the blue. It also just looks far more interesting than the more conservative Sub IMO - but in some ways that is to be expected - the Sub has not really changed in years and years.
From a pure looks point of view I actually think I prefer the omega.
Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
Me too!
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Just like buses...
https://youtu.be/VMDYn41WE_s
Both reviewers focused in on value proposition which is ultimately what wins it for the omega. For me it’s just too big compared to the Rolex (for my taste) and personally I don’t like the bracelet style or hand design. Both cracking watches but what omega are really doing is showing how over priced Rolex are.... and with a 5 year warranty.
I'd always choose the Rolex. Though there was a time I would've chosen Omega, but only because I wanted to avoid Rolex at all costs.
For me if cost were not a consideration then the Rolex would win...but unfortunately shops are not giving these watches away so £ ultimately is a factor. I agree the bracelet on the sub is leagues ahead with its unstated design, however, the omega on rubber strap looks stunning to me, especially so on the two tone rose gold model. The bang for buck proposition for that against a standard steel sub is still really good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Opinion invariably changes if you put the cost on a level playing field, you then get to the watch you really want..
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
https://youtu.be/VMDYn41WE_s[/QUOTE]
Watched this , great video , we all know about the Rolex sub but that new seamaster is very tasty indeed , that ceramic wave dial is stunning too
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Watched this , great video , we all know about the Rolex sub but that new seamaster is very tasty indeed , that ceramic wave dial is stunning too
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app[/QUOTE]
Anyone else find something very annoying about ‘Horology Houses’ videos? He has some great shots, watches but it’s the monotone voice with no break that I find cringe worthy.
Back to the 2 watches. Omega now have a great competitor to the Sub, but always feel the Seamaster looks dated with each incarnation. Whilst the Sun still looks sharpe.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I must say this watch has been growing on me, although I have not seen one in the flesh. My only reservation with modern Omegas is that they are a bit thick compared with the previous ones.
Am serioulsy considering selling my 2531.80 and 2254.50 (which I said I would never do) to buy the black version...
Brave move - I'll never sell my 2531 or 2254
:)
It's just a matter of time...
Personally I don't think the Omega will age well.
For me the Submariner is the 911 of the watch world - subtle updating over the decades. The Omega is more Civic Type R - great technically but with a whiff of the brash about it.
Sent from my SM-J530F using TZ-UK mobile app
Just picked up the Omega TT rose gold model on rubber...lovely watch and in my eyes the watch head is on par with a Rolex Sub. The metal bracelet is a different story but my model is on rubber so that question of Rolex v Omega is out of the equation.
Fine looking watch
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
I agree with this. I think they already look quite aged.
It’s a tough watch to photograph, it looks way better in the flesh. Stunning piece.
I was quite surprised when I saw the new SMP in the flesh, it looks so much better than pictures depict.
I saw a few in a shop window today and they definitely look better in the flesh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Always flummoxes me that big companies can't show off their watches at their best in pics.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk
I think the old one has aged pretty well and I think the new one will do well too. Mine's had a bit of wrist time this week - knocking on 17 years old now.
I think the Porsche 911 has evolved much more radically than the Submariner over the years.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Very tempted with one of these! Enjoy
Just picked up the Omega TT rose gold model on rubber...lovely watch and in my eyes the watch head is on par with a Rolex Sub. The metal bracelet is a different story but my model is on rubber so that question of Rolex v Omega is out of the equation.
Here's my 2531.80.
Love the new Seamasters and i don't like cyclops so Seamaster for me
Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
I highly recommend...haven’t taken it off since I bought it on Wednesday. Very comfortable on the wrist.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A mate of mine picked up a new SM300 couple of weeks ago.....saw it on Friday. Was very impressed, Omega upping their game.
It's incredibly subjective as has been said. When I was looking for my first serious watch I, like many people, started with Rolex, such is their imprint on the popular consciousness.
I went to the AD & tried a dated Sub (don't know the model number but this was 2008). No waiting list or associated malarkey but somehow I didn't bond with it - it felt light, unbalanced & insubstantial, not how I expected a £3.5K (remember those days) watch to feel.
Then I tried a Moonwatch but was put off by the manual wind & plastic crystal. Finally, having discounted the Bond Seamaster because of the overly "busy" bracelet & skeleton hands, I discovered the black 2254. There it was, the watch I'd been waiting for! Why did I choose the 2254? Firstly it spoke to me in a way that the Sub didn't. That was the first, most important thing, the attraction. Secondly, it was the technical equal of the Sub, WR to 300m & COSC certified. Thirdly, a new Sub, then priced at £3.5K, would have cleaned me out. A year old 2254, box and papers, still under Omega warranty, cost me £895. Finally, Subs are ubiquitous & unimaginative in my view, I probably see a couple a day. 2254s are much less obvious.
I chose it for the 4 reasons above. I believe it to be the equal of the Sub in performance, I got a good deal on a watch you don't see every day, but mostly I chose it because I liked it the best.
Same here, my 2254, mostly for sentimental reasons, is a keeper.
Congratulations Michael! The best iteration I think.Just picked up the Omega TT rose gold model on rubber...lovely watch and in my eyes the watch head is on par with a Rolex Sub. The metal bracelet is a different story but my model is on rubber so that question of Rolex v Omega is out of the equation.
Mine says hi.
Martyn.
Looking forward to seeing the new ceramic and titanium in the flesh
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
Posting Permissions
