Tudor GMT or new Seamaster Diver 300M?

Hello All,

New on here and struggling to make a decision between these two. I currently have a Planet Ocean 2500 and was set on the Tudor but whilst on the waiting list for that I made the mistake of checking out the new Seamaster which was very impressive. There are pros and cons to both but I really am 50/50 so wondered if anyone here owned both and what the opinions are. I've also seen a pre-owned Explorer I at a good price which has added to the confusion but I've dismissed that (I think!) as I might get bored with it quickly and it seemed a bit small.

Any thoughts welcome!

I've only seen photos of both, but on the basis that the new Seamaster looks a total mess to me I would choose the Tudor GMT. That said Id choose most watches over the SMP! If you are keeping the P.O then the Explorer might give more variety than the Tudor.

Tudor.

Having just picked up a Tudor GMT my vote is for the Tudor which looks even better in the flesh than photos and is a great quality watch for the price. Not a small watch mind.

If you’re keeping the Planet Ocean then I would go for the Tudor which looks like a great watch notwithstanding the reported date change issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It would be the Seamaster for my money every time. Modern classic.

Ian

I would say the Tudor. Personally not a fan of the new SeaMaster - the engraved ceramic dial is OTT, the release valve is huge and it has a display case back rather than the engraved seahorse which is all kinds of wrong for a SeaMaster! My mate has the 2017 SeaMaster and it is much nicer, more understated and well proportioned - personally I'd get that if in the market for an Omega.

Even then the Tudor would probably still edge it; I'm a big fan of Tudor, they have been smashing it with their releases in the last few years and that GMT looks fantastic.

Has to be the Tudor in my opinion.

Not a fan of the new 300, prefer the older model.

I have heard the Seamaster dial described as "contemporary" and for me therein lies the problem. I do not think it will age well and residuals will reflect that.

That said I do appreciate the use of materials which I can see other manufacturers adopting.

Not for me but each to their own.

If Tudor had a decent chronograph and better dress watch offering I could see them taking sales across the board from Omega and others.

OT the watch I regret selling most was my Tudor Big Block Chronograph...

Sent from my SM-J530F using TZ-UK mobile app

GMT. No question. Just parted with one but not for a moment due to the watch.
It's a quality piece and not ubiquitous. Dosh will be useful in a non-watch related project; suspect another GMT might cross my path in future. Hope so.

Has to be the Tudor GMT for me, however always buy what you like rather than what complete stranger on a forum suggest you buy


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hocuspocus

I have heard the Seamaster dial described as "contemporary" and for me therein lies the problem. I do not think it will age well and residuals will reflect that.

That said I do appreciate the use of materials which I can see other manufacturers adopting.

Not for me but each to their own.

If Tudor had a decent chronograph and better dress watch offering I could see them taking sales across the board from Omega and others.

OT the watch I regret selling most was my Tudor Big Block Chronograph...

Sent from my SM-J530F using TZ-UK mobile app

---

Tudor has an excellent ('decent') chronograph in the Black Bay heritage chrono'. Breitling cal 01 in-house movement in collaboration with Tudor. 70 hour power reserve, not too shabby at this price point IMHO. My own 'heritage' chrono' is lovely, allbeit with a lowly? Valjoux with Depraz module. But the engineering build quality is a pleasure to behold, better than Breitling IMHO & I own a couple.
https://i.postimg.cc/LsLJ6Ds3/001.jpg

It's worth trying both on to see which feels more comfortable. Some feel that the Tudor can be too big but it does depend on your wrist size. I was in the same position as you and have decided to go for the seamaster 2017 model. I'm not sure I like the newer version! Although if I already had a PO then I'd go for the Tudor.

Definitely Tudor.

Sent from my SM-N950F using TZ-UK mobile app

Tudor, you see the odd one second hand and at good prices .Imho Class act at a cheap price compared to some other brands.On my hit list:eagerness:

I think the new Seamaster gets a bit of a raw deal. It has a fantastic spec and I think the blue and the black versions look good.....that said, for me the Tudor GMT is one of the watches of 2018
I would have got one myself if the Doxa Sub 300 silver lung hadn't been released

I picked up a Tudor GMT yesterday and I’m extremely impressed. Have tried one on nato but wanted a bracelet so waited. Initially concerned that the rivets would look a bit naff but in the flesh they are tiny and as a result work fine.

Bezel colour is superb, both colours muted and very retro looking. Lots of fantastic details.

My only issue is getting it off, I’ll have to stop biting my nails as carrying a plectrum with me isn’t a great option!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From what I see Tudor has plonked itself below the more pricey brands (its parent, for instance) deliberately, and is set on delivering as much quality as it possibly can within that constraint. It is happy in its market-perceived position.
Omega, on the other hand, has ambitions to increase prices to Rolex levels, and seems to have set itself on a path to do so. As such it is punching above where most people think it is placed in the heirachy of brands, and, despite some very good technical innovations, it is struggling to maintain this move up the scale.

What this most affects is depreciation, most of the higher end Omega models seem to drop a lot of their value very quickly (there are some lvoely ones on SC right now that are significantly below RRP and have been tehre for weeks).

Which is a real shame as I like the extra technology and style Omega is busting a gut to put into its watches. I would love to own the Omega Seamaster 300 Master Co-axial, it is a lovely watch. But, to me, it is simply not a £6k watch. Or a £4k watch, or even a £3k watch (well, maybe 3).

Plus, it makes a new Omega a difficult buy, and a used one a good value buy.

I did buy the BB GMT new, and as a Tudor fan ('76 Snowflake, ETA Pelagos and now BB GMT) I love the aesthetic, but the point is that at under £3k with the large power reserve and hour-hacking true GMT, it is a lot of watch for the money.

The Omega has the hands I despise, and at £900 more (RRP) it has little more to recommend it. Sure, it has better magnetic resistance, but no hour hacking, 55 hour reserve not 70, WR that is more, but not usably so (the Tudor's 200m is enough for all but the most qualified of divers). From my perspective, it doesn't justify its additional cost.

I would always recommend the Tudor, I bought one and I really love it. But I do think there is justification for that choice too.

Dave

Thanks all for the responses. I'm leaning towards the more 'classic' look of the Tudor and as I will be keeping the PO I think that's what I'll go for.

Now just to see how quickly the waiting list goes down!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sweets

From what I see Tudor has plonked itself below the more pricey brands (its parent, for instance) deliberately, and is set on delivering as much quality as it possibly can within that constraint. It is happy in its market-perceived position.
Omega, on the other hand, has ambitions to increase prices to Rolex levels, and seems to have set itself on a path to do so. As such it is punching above where most people think it is placed in the heirachy of brands, and, despite some very good technical innovations, it is struggling to maintain this move up the scale

---

I think this is a very valid point, and it does indeed seem that Omega's management are intent on pushing the brand higher up the luxury chain and competing with Rolex, in certain areas at least. As you say, however, the members of this good parish will be looking for some justification behind the price rises and the repositioning. I understand that the move to the Daniels escapement is part of the official story, and I can take that at face value, but further price rises will need some more meat behind them if the (admittedly small) enthusiast community is to be convinced. It can't all be about intangible brand equity.

As far as the new SMP is concerned, I haven't seen it in the metal but it looks a little bloated and ungainly in the photos and I'm not convinced by that laser-etched dial. I have an early 2000s model and really like the textured dial surface - not sure the latest one will have the same depth, appeal or (for those who care about such matters) residuals.

SGR

I would go for the Seamaster through and through. It's a classic, IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sweets

From what I see Tudor has plonked itself below the more pricey brands (its parent, for instance) deliberately, and is set on delivering as much quality as it possibly can within that constraint. It is happy in its market-perceived position.
Omega, on the other hand, has ambitions to increase prices to Rolex levels, and seems to have set itself on a path to do so. As such it is punching above where most people think it is placed in the heirachy of brands, and, despite some very good technical innovations, it is struggling to maintain this move up the scale.

What this most affects is depreciation, most of the higher end Omega models seem to drop a lot of their value very quickly (there are some lvoely ones on SC right now that are significantly below RRP and have been tehre for weeks).

Which is a real shame as I like the extra technology and style Omega is busting a gut to put into its watches. I would love to own the Omega Seamaster 300 Master Co-axial, it is a lovely watch. But, to me, it is simply not a £6k watch. Or a £4k watch, or even a £3k watch (well, maybe 3).

Plus, it makes a new Omega a difficult buy, and a used one a good value buy.

I did buy the BB GMT new, and as a Tudor fan ('76 Snowflake, ETA Pelagos and now BB GMT) I love the aesthetic, but the point is that at under £3k with the large power reserve and hour-hacking true GMT, it is a lot of watch for the money.

The Omega has the hands I despise, and at £900 more (RRP) it has little more to recommend it. Sure, it has better magnetic resistance, but no hour hacking, 55 hour reserve not 70, WR that is more, but not usably so (the Tudor's 200m is enough for all but the most qualified of divers). From my perspective, it doesn't justify its additional cost.

I would always recommend the Tudor, I bought one and I really love it. But I do think there is justification for that choice too.

Dave

---

Some great observations there Dave. That's why I'm leaning towards pre owned rather than new omega. Between the two watches, I don't think you can make a wrong choice as they both look great! Not sold on the 2018 seamaster though.

Having handled a 2018 SMP I must say it looks much better in real life than in photos.

Still prefer my 2012 original though over either of the ceramics.

I agree, I wasn't keen on the SMP at all from the pictures but in real life it is much nicer and looks very high quality, certainly on a par with the SubC now.

I still prefer the previous SMPc to the new one and I still kind of want one even though I've also got a PO. I'm not into the new BB GMT at all myself, and this probably won't go down well, but if you want a homage why not buy a Steinhart for £600 rather than a Tudor for £3k.

Check them out in the flesh under natural light. I think the new SMP is so excellent I ended up
buying one:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Watches/O...DSC_0220-L.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Watches/O...DSC_0214-L.jpg

Martyn

Not sure if the GMT is the right comparison, surely a Tudor diver, maybe the BB58?

Personally I like the Omega better, some great tech in there too - but as mentioned by Sweets, it is quite expensive and Tudor do make a great watch. I don't think you can really go wrong with either. Best to try them both and see what sings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK)

Check them out in the flesh under natural light. I think the new SMP is so excellent I ended up
buying one:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Watches/O...DSC_0220-L.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Watches/O...DSC_0214-L.jpg

Martyn

---

Congrats!!! This is the best version in my opinion. I'll be buying it also soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeremyO

Having handled a 2018 SMP I must say it looks much better in real life than in photos.

Still prefer my 2012 original though over either of the ceramics.

---

I agree. To be fair I bashed this watch when the photos were released. Once I seen one and tried one on I was in love with it.

I like the GMT a LOT.. not as much as the 58, but still a lovely watch! I'd choose it over the SM300, its something different for your collection and if nothing else, a bit of brand differentiation!

I thought that this was a watch forum?

The obvious answer is buy both...

Does the omega have the adjustable bracelet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coolchow

Does the omega have the adjustable bracelet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Having played with a black one yesterday I can say yes it does. And very nice it is too.
It is as thick as the GMT so that's that competitor out of the way and a little bigger. But that extra large conical helium escape valve and the new dial do nothing for me. I have a 2220.80.00 SMP300 and the Tudor.
I would recommend the GMT over the new 300. But as others have already said the choice is all yours.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk