Reply With QuoteBB58 is a great watch - black or blue. One of them Id say.
Having scaled back my watches and basically being a serial flipper for the last couple of years Im longing for a (nice but not too expensive watch I could wear day or night without the apprehension of having it eyed up by some scroat).
Im thinking an Omega Planet Ocean Model Number 2201.50.00 or the Tudor BB58 Blue...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
BB58 is a great watch - black or blue. One of them Id say.
Id agree, Ive had the black 58 and also had a PO in the past, I guess the saying you dont miss what you have until its gone is very apt here...Originally Posted by Devonian
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
To me it depends on where you want to wear it. The BB has the slimmer profile so maybe less 'obvious' than the PO and also would fit easier under a shirt cuff if you wanted to. So in that respect the BB is more versatile. If you are invariably in more casual attire then PO may be more appropriate (but the BB would work too). Consider the comfort of wearing the two, if you have larger wrists the PO may be fine else consider the BB as a better alternative.
Martyn
I bought a 42mm PO 2500D last year after having lusted after one for some time and sold it about six months later. There really wasn't very much I could fault with the watch other than lack of micro-adjustment on the clasp (it is possible to retrofit another clasp from the Omega range which has micro-adjustment), but I just found it boring in the end. I tend to wear my watches on week long rotations and I found myself looking forward to wearing something else the following week, which probably said it all. I think it really was great watch, I just didn't really gel with it and my Black Bay Harrods rather unexpectedly arrived....
I am looking forward to trying a BB58 in blue though, quite possibly my next watch!
I dont have the chunkiest of wrists and I always liked the profile of the BB58, it was a while ago i had a PO, cant remember them being too chunky, possible be wrong though?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
PO. Gorgeous in many of its iterations.
Sent through the ether by diddling with radio waves
That isn't a BB58 Blue in your pic?
Out of the two I would probably to BB58 but might be tempted to go black. Or the orange PO in black or orange. Great watch but the clasp shows it's age, could be better on a strap.
I got it yesterday and it is so nice. The size is perfect, and the weight...you can feel its there but not too heavy at all. They really got it right with the colours too. Happy choosing!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Of the two I'd go for the PO. Had one from new and it's a perfect tool watch. Solid and with a good bracelet but goes under the radar for everyday wear. Timekeeping is brilliant on mine as well. The Tudor just doesn't look as smooth to my eyes.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Both are beauts, wanted ad's are up so I'll see what happens lol...
There was a slight difference in the PO C or D iterations. IIRC, the WTBs were often for Ds rather than Cs. Worth bearing that in mind.
I was all set for a BB58 Blue (I had a blueTudor Snowflake a few years back and sold it for 1,200 or something thinking I'd find a better example for not much more - I blame James Hyman, had he been doing his sterling work then I could have had the dodgy relume sorted out and still have the watch now!) but have been distracted by a Seiko SLA023, the blue MM300. It's a big thing in height but not so much in width, where it feels like a 40mm watch (width of the bezel) but has the cushion case making it look bigger on paper. It's a cracking watch on the bracelet, which has an adjustable clasp, or on an Erika's or rubber strap. I'm sure I'll end up with a BB58 eventually but I've worn the Seiko almost every day since I bought it a month ago and its a fantastic watch. Worth a look?
"A man of little significance"
Yup the a and b had a few issues, the c were much better and then the d was the final update, so presume these had everything ironed out.
The 2201.50 is a classic imo, slimmer case profile than in house, and aluminium bezel. I have thought about getting one in past to complement my black sub. And I agree, it is a lot less flash so better for security. Bit like 5 vs 6 digit subs. Bb58 blue is nice, but if it were me, Ill choose classic PO over bb58.
They are nice, I had the green version a couple of years ago but and heres the but...
I just cant get away with the X logo on the dial, it cheapens the watch for me, they should of left it as MarineMaster like on the early versions...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks, Ill do some checks if one comes up for sale and try and stay away from the A/B models...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd go for the Bb58 blue of the two, it just looks a great piece. Some of the PO variants are nice, but the HE valve ruins the balance of the watch for me.
Sent from my H3113 using Tapatalk
I had an early BB58 black which I flipped quickly as it felt too small and never regretted. I also had an early PO 2500d which I foolishly traded and instantly regretted but was lucky enough to pick this one off Scott which is a stunner so the 2500d PO gets my vote in any guise.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Both very well designed watches. Similarly straightforward and monochrome.
Def comes down to use and size. As a daily, I've got to favour the Tudor for it's comfort and, by extension, versatility.
If a watch more for casual and recreational I'd go PO.
I prefer the design of the PO but it must be a good 50 grams heavier, maybe 75.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using TZ-UK mobile app
The PO has been my daily for the last 8 years. The only thing to really annoy, is the bracelet/clasp for minor adjustments. As mentioned its done in the form of a half link. So in really hot weather it was to tight and loose when cold. However I wear mine and prefer it on a rubber strap for which I have an omega one which I purchased off here. As for A,B,C variations, I have an early one which out performs a friends more recent effort when it comes to time keeping. Oh and the glass has a anti glare coating which can be scratched
^Yes, from memory it wasn't the time keeping that was the issue. I think there were some problems.
My C variant was fine but as I say, some WTBs specified a D variant so worth getting later if you're considering reselling at some point.
How about the PO 39.5? It has a new 8800 movement and is just around 14mm thick - so much thinner than any other newer POs was launched in 2016 I think. Its a bit thicker than the BB58 but more similar in diameter. I recently got one for my daily and its great on the micro adjustable bracelet or a rubber strap....
Its something I looked at but too expensive, didnt really want to pay as much as that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I still love my PO 2500c, the orange adds interest to the dial and Ive fitted a micro adjust clasp.
The BB58 is very versatile as plenty of options to have it in bracelet, NATO, rubber, canvas, leather to suit all the occasions.
Though, might be me, I miss not having the open case back so I'm looking to pair it with a PO 39.5mm. Same versatility but with open case back
Inviato dal mio LG-H870 utilizzando Tapatalk
I still have nightmares about selling that watch on too. Cant believe I let that dodgy lume marker at 11 bother me with such a glorious faded blue insert. Like to have said we live and learn mate.......recall that rather superb faded Autavia I bought from you for 950 as well. What were we thinking?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have a PO 2500C and have loved it from the first moment I unwrapped it. Problem is since getting it my other watches don't get a look in.
I maybe just lucky but the bracelet fits fine, however I did have to source an extra half link. Still not a problem as I were it most of the time on a nato.
I have a 6.75 inch wrist and rhe 42mm PO sits nicely on it in my eyes. I also have some 44mm seikos I can just get away with.
I have no experience of the Tudor but appreciate its a nice design and a hard decision if you are split 50/50.
In which case go with your heart.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Classic herd mentality...
The Planet Ocean never had the co-axial A or B versions: it started life fitted with the 2500C, and ended with the 2500D.
What “checks” will you be doing?
Do you have a preference for a C or D version?
Always remember my local watch maker saying something about early co-axial movements being a nightmare to work on when I had a Railmaster...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So a 2500B from the sounds of it?
The PO only had C or D.
Why bother with a C when you could have a D? It's a common watch.
1. Because there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with the C iteration.
2. Because the D is not worth paying a substantial premium for IMO.
3. Because the OP shouldn’t pay more than is necessary because “forum says”.
Hate to break it to you but the Planet Ocean will always be a common watch. Minutiae in escapement design really does not have much importance beyond hardcore WIS.
Last edited by Dent99; 29th August 2020 at 11:49.
Appreciate all the comments on here, knowing me Ill probably get both haha...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wrote a review on the 42mm cal 2500 Planet Ocean that I bought from sales corner here and had serviced for 500 EUR at authorized Omega watchmaker.
https://ghostofgeraldgenta.com/2020/...cal-2500-42mm/
In short:
- It is a pretty common misconception that the 42mm PO is a big watch. I can barely feel the difference to my 16610 sub. It wears smaller than my 2254.50 did.
- The rubber strap and shark mesh work super well.
- PO never shipped with the problematic 2500 A / B movements. All are either C or D.
Before committing to purchase I tried it on the bracelet and figured out that it is not for me. I was able to anticipate this because I ended up not liking the 2254.50 bracelet. This is not a bad thing because there are so many references and you can find a good deal on watch that didn't come on a bracelet. I would prefer condition / recent service over the D movement.
Finally, I've had the earlier BB58, and I have to say that BB58 is a very, very different watch in terms of how it wears.
You're not breaking anything to me.
I had a long chat with Simon Freese when he serviced my C variant. When I was selling, Cs and Ds were similarly priced.
To think I sold my old one a couple of years ago for 2k...
I am interested that you choose an Omega that is quite large, and very notably thick.
And the Tudor that you single out as the alternative to the PO is not the one the same size as the PO, but the model that is specifically smaller, the BB58.
Any particular reason why the more comparable (in size) BBs have been ignored?
D
Funny thing perceptions.
Seeing as I have had a 2201.50 (2500D) I will weigh in if it helps the OP.
I agree with you that even at 42mm it wears smaller than the 41mm SMP, but that is if looking at the watch from above.
On the PO I think the larger dial appliqus, extra text and Arabic numerals makes for a more cramped dial with less clear ‘space’ and the bezel insert design (with black AND silver ring) make the watch look smaller.
On the wrist though, it definitely wears taller because of its thickness. Not as to be unergonomic, but I found it noticeable and not as comfortable as the SMP. The SMP wearing larger, despite actually being smaller(!) because it has more clear space on the dial, and wears closer to the wrist as it is thinner then the PO.
I didn’t own the PO more than a year or so as the design was a bit ‘flat‘ for me. A great looking watch but just didn’t bond with it like others I’ve had. I’ve never got my knickers in a twist over the lack of micro adjustment like some on here do but the only thing I didn’t like on the PO was the bracelet end link that connects to the watch head: it is sculpted as to give the illusion of being constructed of three separate pieces and looks incredibly cheap to my eye, especially when compared to SMPs of the same era.
I had no issues with the D movement. That said, I’ve had another 2500C powered watch for over 10 years, unserviced as yet, also without issues.
FYI I bought the D because I had the option when it was new, and being knowledgeable of the difference it offered a small difference to the 2500C I already had. Also knowing it was being phased our after a brief production run, in favour of the 8500 PO, I figured it would give me extra USP should I come to sell it to an anorak... but to the OP - that doesn’t mean you should search out and pay more if you do not care for the difference!
I currently have a BB58 and it really is something special. The proportions, finishing and gold hands and minute track just work. It’s a bit slab sided, but not like the 41mm version. My only concern is over the very proud bezel lume dot that I worry could get knocked out. Other than that it’s a stunner and I think a future classic.
The gen1 PO 42mm 2201.50 is, IMO, the best Planet Ocean Omega ever made and is something of a modern classic. I also think that with the chunkier case, the recessed bezel lume dot, and more substantial bezel design, it could probably take a bit more rough and tumble than the BB58.
Both good choices, you can’t go wrong with either, but my vote obviously has to be the Black Bay.
Last edited by Dent99; 29th August 2020 at 12:33.
So what point are you making? Why say why have C when he can have D?
If youre now saying the general market doesnt care for the difference, why should the OP?
Last edited by Dent99; 29th August 2020 at 12:35.
I disagree, the 42mm PO wears well in my eyes, I remember having one and not being concerned by the weight or size, the reason why I am looking at the BB58 Blue is simply really, its as close to a Tudor Blue Sub as I'm ever going to be able to afford and I've always liked the simply look of the blue Tudor sub's.
There is nothing to disagree with. I am merely interested that you selected an Omega in one size, and as an alternative, a Tudor in another size.
It's fine, there is no problem with it, my point was that Tudor so a wealth of 42mm equivalent BB and Pelagos watches that would compare more directly with the PO.
But the PO and the BB58 are so different, that you are going to have to get both.
1. Market information.
2. Watch issues.
3. Perception and reality.
They're separate things.
Google the issue and you will see what Omega did.
Have a good day.
I'll prob try both then settle on one tbh, just always regretted selling my PO and as much as I liked the BB58 I had I always thought they should of done the blue, hey presto lol.
What is it the snarky-ness on this forum? So many armchair experts with an attitude..
I dont need to google it thank you very much. I used to sell Omega for a living and Ill guess probability is on my side if I assume I worked closer with the brand and had greater access to conversations on this topic then yourself?
Do I have to say the above to have others acknowledge that despite some issues, grossly over-exaggerated btw, with some 2500C units, they were not representative of some cataclysmic design failure?
Omega are known for constant tinkering, inside and out, and once theyd decided they could easily retrofit the two level escapement style from the 8500 into the 2500, albeit briefly, it does not make the revision a statement of failure where the C was concerned, or an issue worth worrying about on the whole.
But whatever.
By separating out the two jobs done by the coaxial wheel in the D revision, Omega addressed an issue with oil migration that was widely believed to cause issues for the C revision. Whether the issue was a substantial problem or not is moot. Just as the B to C revision addressed an issue with poor starting, it isn't clear how much this was pandering to public perception or even adding in a USP and how much to mechanical necessity. In both cases probably a bit of both. The B revision beat at the same rate as the 2892/a2 and so the revision from B to C took the watch further away from the original as it reduced the beat rate.
Last edited by M4tt; 29th August 2020 at 13:27.
The technical benefits of a revision cannot be ignored but I dont think the relative quantity of issues with 2500C is a moot point at all when recommending to a prospective buyer. The way some wax lyrical on here about the 2500D, theyd have you believe the 2500C was a turkey when it most certainly was not.
Read back through my posts, they're quite reasonable.
As I said before, have a good day.
The 2500C certainly garnered a reputation for stopping suddenly. Whether that reputation was deserved has had a lot of ink wasted on it, much by me. Personally I do not think that it was. Clearly neither do you. However, the fact is that the main difference between the C and D revision was a move away from the purity of Daniels' vision to an arguably less elegant solution that would certainly solve the problem of oil migration around the coaxial wheel, probably caused by over oiling or poor application of epilame. It's generally believed, wrongly or rightly, that there was a problem and this was the cause.
As such, from an aesthetic point of view I prefer the C revision, from an engineering point of view I can see strengths on both sides, but from a pragmatic point of view the D revision is undeniably the better buy as it has no stigma, wrongly or rightly, attached. As such, unless you have a very clear idea of what you are buying and why, or care about the more 'poetic' aspects of a wristwatch movement, I'd recommend the D. However, the C revision is probably closest to Daniels' vision of a mass market coaxial escapement while the B revision is arguably the most interesting.
^M4tt, Dent, thank you both for expanding my knowledge in this area.
And mine also gents, my old watch repair never really wanted to work on my co axial movement...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
