closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 48 of 48

Thread: Will Omega ever make serious dive watches again?

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721

    Will Omega ever make serious dive watches again?

    I know it may upset a few, but it is truly how I have been feeling about Omega for these last few years.

    Apart for the 6000m Deep, which is nice but an unpractical mammoth of a watch for bragging rights, I feel that Omega have lost their way with the Seamasters.

    Gone are the days of solid casebacks. Even the Ploprof has an exhibition back nowadays! Also, the original Ploprof was a 600m He-gas diver. Now it needs an He valve.

    In my eyes, the 300m SMP, which was always a very close runner up to the Submariner has become a jewelry watch. It retains almost nothing of the original, apart from the oversized (and unproportioned) skeleton hands. The modern Submariner runs circles around it now. It really is a shame for me.

    Ok rant over. Where do I find a late model wave dial Omega SMP Chronograph powered by the 1164 movement? Anyone got one they want to sell? To this day, I still cannot find a better dive chronograph. Shame I didn't get one when they were available new.
    Last edited by buddy13; 28th September 2022 at 08:59.

  2. #2
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    14,535
    To be honest, I can't see you can describe many 'luxury' dive watches as 'serious'.

    You mention the Submariner repeatedly, but what can it do that a Sinn or a Pelagos, for example, doesn't do just as well?

    The Ploprof reissue is not intended to be the tool it was, no one NEEDS a Ploprof these days (actually it turned out they never did...), it's the epitome of a 'luxury'.

    Omega and Rolex are in the market for luxury goods, not tools, these days.

    If you want a 'serious dive watch', you need to look away from luxury brands, imo.

    M
    Last edited by snowman; 28th September 2022 at 09:13.
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  3. #3
    Master unclealec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    6,342
    The closest I get to diving is the leak-tester tub in my tyre bay - but do I not recall that many pro divers choose the Divex or similar these days?
    It would support the tool vs. jewellery argument.

  4. #4
    Yup. No such thing as a luxury tool in my opinion.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    Will Omega ever make serious dive watches again?.
    No, why would they? What serious Diver is going to a highstreet jeweller looking to spend upwards of £5000 for a piece of diving equipment. Nobody.

    For a long time now Swiss watch brands haven't been designing products with sports professionals as their target, they're designed for those who aspire to that kind of lifestyle. Much like today's 4x4s and SUV's - aspirational and lifestyle marketing all over.

  6. #6
    Master
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    2,562
    In my eyes, the 300m SMP, which was always a very close runner up to the Submariner has become a jewelry watch. It retains almost nothing of the original, apart from the oversized (and unproportioned) skeleton hands. The modern Submariner runs circles around it now. It really is a shame for me.

    I don't defend either brand and i have both.

    Up to maybe a few years ago the Seamaster SMP at around £3500-£4000 was for me the best dive watch on the market for quality and price.

    It was quality wise as good if not better in some aspects than the Rolex although the skelton hands have always been a moot point with some.

    I had a Rolex SD43/50 and changed to the SMP and for me the SMP was a far better watch even though it cost half the price.

    I do wish like most that they would make an updated version of the 2254 but time will tell.

  7. #7
    There is little market for it, dive computers took over long long ago for actual divers

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisparker View Post
    No, why would they? What serious Diver is going to a highstreet jeweller looking to spend upwards of £5000 for a piece of diving equipment. Nobody.
    Oi! I resemble that remark.






    R
    Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.

  9. #9
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Stockton, Teesside, UK
    Posts
    1,496
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post

    In my eyes, the 300m SMP, which was always a very close runner up to the Submariner has become a jewelry watch. The modern Submariner runs circles around it now. It really is a shame for me.
    Lets be honest the Submariner is effectively a jewelry watch as well these days (even if it still functions well as a Dive watch). Not that many divers can, or will want to, dive with something that costs £12k or whatever one costs these days - when there enourmous numbers of perfectly satisfactory alternative watches far cheaper, or who would mostly use a Dive Computer anyway.

  10. #10
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    I must be crazy then, as I would never buy a dive watch that I do not intend to take with me on any dive :).

    Why buy a dive watch in the first place if you fear swimming in it or scratching it? Just for the bezel? Any mobile phone can do a better job than it can on land.

    It seems that what you say is that Omega are driven by market research and decided to abandon their traditions and that is exactly my point. You all seem to agree. The vast majority of the market, as proven by the comments here, does not care about function over form anymore it seems. The beauty in a dive watch for me, is not in being able to peer at the movement through glass, but knowing that this was at least one day used as a proper tool.

    Kudos to Rolex then, while producing the best selling dive watch there is, they still managed to retain all the functions of the original. They did not give in to people who buy it as jewelry and fit a display back, as Omega did.

    Neither did Seiko with the Tunas.

    Good thing we still have brands like Seiko, Tudor, Sinn and Rolex (even if I don't afford them anymore) who prioritize function over form.
    Last edited by buddy13; 28th September 2022 at 13:27.

  11. #11
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    14,535
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    I must be crazy then, as I would never buy a dive watch that I do not intend to take with me on any dive :).

    Why buy a dive watch in the first place if you fear swimming in it or scratching it? Just for the bezel? Any mobile phone can do a better job than it can on land.

    ...

    Kudos to Rolex then, while producing the best selling dive watch there is, they still managed to retain all the functions of the original. They did not give in to people who buy it as jewelry and fit a display back, as Omega did.

    Neither did Seiko with the Tunas.

    Good thing we still have brands like Seiko, Tudor, Sinn and Rolex (even if I don't afford them anymore) who prioritize function over form.
    I'm baffled - How is Rolex favouring function over form while the Ploprof is 'jewelery' just because they found a way to fit a display back and retain the WR?

    This just seems like a thinly veild "Rolex am great" post...

    Or maybe it's a "I hate display backs", but either way your premise about Omega not being 'serious dive watches' seems to be nonsense while you can rave about a Rolex (or price hiked Seiko) being one.

    M
    Last edited by snowman; 28th September 2022 at 13:35.
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  12. #12
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    To be honest, I can't see you can describe many 'luxury' dive watches as 'serious'.

    You mention the Submariner repeatedly, but what can it do that a Sinn or a Pelagos, for example, doesn't do just as well?

    The Ploprof reissue is not intended to be the tool it was, no one NEEDS a Ploprof these days (actually it turned out they never did...), it's the epitome of a 'luxury'.

    Omega and Rolex are in the market for luxury goods, not tools, these days.

    If you want a 'serious dive watch', you need to look away from luxury brands, imo.

    M
    Well, you may want to call my SMPc, Pelagos or Tunas 'luxury' watches, but I certainly think they are serious dive watches and I dive in them and have done so for more than a decade.

    A submariner cannot do anything better than a Sinn or Pelagos, but who said it does?

    Well a Submariner just has a better movement. Forget Metas. The architecture, reliability & pedigree of the 3135 or 3235 cannot be beat. Technically, the 3135 and the 7C46 are the epitome of dive watch movements.

    Notice for just one detail that while 'Rolex' uses Silicon hairsprings in all the Tudor MT movements, they still use their proprietary Parachrom Blue metal alloy. Do not believe that a Silicon hairspring in an Omega or Tudor movement is better. More antimagnetic (amagnetic) it may be, but not better.

  13. #13
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    I'm baffled - How is Rolex favouring function over form while the Ploprof is 'jewelery' just because they found a way to fit a display back and retain the WR?

    This just seems like a thinly veild "Rolex am great" post...

    M
    Ok let me answer your question with another question.

    How does a display back on a Professional dive watch improve its function?

  14. #14
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    13,888
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    Ok let me answer your question with another question.

    How does a display back on a Professional dive watch improve its function?
    And the same question can be asked of any dive watch that isn't quartz. Beyond that, I'd say Eddie has us covered:


  15. #15
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    14,535
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    Ok let me answer your question with another question.

    How does a display back on a Professional dive watch improve its function?
    How does the lack of one?

    The days of a dive watch as an essential tool are long gone.

    Of course, you CAN dive with a watch and a gauge, but most people don't.

    And again, as long as the WR isn't compromised, how does a display back affect the watch in any detrimental way?

    Your argument about the 'better' movement in one mechanical watch over another is equally moot, a quartz dive watch for under £200 will beat them all, but few people will do dives that exceed an hour, so +/-10s/d a day isn't going to make any difference to the effectiveness of the watch as a tool for diving anyway!

    You don't like display backs, that's fine. You like Rolexes, I get that, but your arguments that Omega dive watches are somehow useless as a dive watch are defeating themselves.

    M
    Last edited by snowman; 28th September 2022 at 13:59.
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    I must be crazy then, as I would never buy a dive watch that I do not intend to take with me on any dive :).

    Why buy a dive watch in the first place if you fear swimming in it or scratching it? Just for the bezel? Any mobile phone can do a better job than it can on land.

    It seems that what you say is that Omega are driven by market research and decided to abandon their traditions and that is exactly my point. You all seem to agree. The vast majority of the market, as proven by the comments here, does not care about function over form anymore it seems. The beauty in a dive watch for me, is not in being able to peer at the movement through glass, but knowing that this was at least one day used as a proper tool.

    Kudos to Rolex then, while producing the best selling dive watch there is, they still managed to retain all the functions of the original. They did not give in to people who buy it as jewelry and fit a display back, as Omega did.

    Neither did Seiko with the Tunas.

    Good thing we still have brands like Seiko, Tudor, Sinn and Rolex (even if I don't afford them anymore) who prioritize function over form.

    I wouldn't say kudos to Rolex, as they've done exactly the same as Omega, before in fact. And are driven by market research as much as any brand. Back in the day how many divers do you think said to Rolex, we love the 5513, but what it really lacks is white gold surrounds on the hour markers? Those white gold bits, over sized cases, beautiful packaging aren't of the benefit of divers. Nor is the two-tone (excluding Ralphy), and solid gold models. They're designed to look good in the office.

    If Rolex really wanted to develop the submariner to for diving, it would have come with a rubber strap as an option, much like the Pelagos, yet they keep that option for Gold Yachtmasters and top-end Daytona's.

    Why buy a dive watch in the first place if you fear swimming in it or scratching it? Just for the bezel? Any mobile phone can do a better job than it can on land.


    Same reason people buy trainers and tracksuits without ever training or going to the athletics track, or why we wear Polo shirts but don't have a horse. A mountain bike but don't live near a mountain range and so on.

    It's not that most people pamper their watches either, I've had a few submariners, they've all got wet in the Sea and swimming pools. I love the look of them but the deepest I've dived is a few metres, snorkelling.

    When it comes to the luxury/mechanical watch industry very few brands prioritize function over form, I can't think of any really. If you really think those brands listed are, their marketing is doing its job well.

  17. #17
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisparker View Post

    When it comes to the luxury/mechanical watch industry very few brands prioritize function over form, I can't think of any really. If you really think those brands listed are, their marketing is doing its job well.
    Seiko, with the SBDX035.

    The SBDX035 is a technical improvement over the already excellent 6159 grandfather Tuna. Seiko didn't go and fit a display back to it, as Omega did to their Ploprof.

    Finally I think we have to agree to disagree.

  18. #18
    Master paneristi372's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Barrowford
    Posts
    3,110
    The Ploprof was the tool diver within the Omega range. Word from my AD is that the Stainless Steel is set to make a reappearance later this year as the Titanium version wasn't well received. I'm sure when it does come back it'll have an eye watering RRP.

  19. #19
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    19,005
    The ploprof was great but the price of the titanium was way too strong. Shame as the titanium was a no date and looked much nicer for it imo.

    A steel no date at a less insane price could be interesting.

  20. #20
    Master paneristi372's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Barrowford
    Posts
    3,110
    Quote Originally Posted by wileeeeeey View Post
    The ploprof was great but the price of the titanium was way too strong. Shame as the titanium was a no date and looked much nicer for it imo.

    A steel no date at a less insane price could be interesting.
    I agree. Mine is back at Omega having a date issue fixed along with a service. I did say to them if it was possible to replace the dial with the black titanium dial thus rendering the date function null and void. They declined.

  21. #21
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by paneristi372 View Post
    I'm sure when it does come back it'll have an eye watering RRP.
    Like more or less every other watch (and everything) these days.

    Not so long ago you could buy a nice SMP for 1500 Euro and a 16610 for 3000 Euro. Bring back those days!

    I bought my first Tuna (SBBN007) for 380 Euro.

  22. #22
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by paneristi372 View Post
    I agree. Mine is back at Omega having a date issue fixed along with a service. I did say to them if it was possible to replace the dial with the black titanium dial thus rendering the date function null and void. They declined.
    Why would you want to do that?! The 8500 is a date movement. Would it not bother you to have a 'phantom' crown position which is changing the date, but nothing is happening to the watch?

    Must say that Omega did well there. Sorry :)

  23. #23
    Master paneristi372's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Barrowford
    Posts
    3,110
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    Why would you want to do that?! The 8500 is a date movement. Would it not bother you to have a 'phantom' crown position which is changing the date, but nothing is happening to the watch?

    Must say that Omega did well there. Sorry :)
    Never even considered that, just thought about my preference to non date watches.

  24. #24
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    cheshire
    Posts
    1,580
    Quote Originally Posted by M4tt View Post
    And the same question can be asked of any dive watch that isn't quartz. Beyond that, I'd say Eddie has us covered:
    I've never understood why any diver would use a mechanical watch instead of a more robust quartz. I used to think that maybe there was a possibility of batter failure at extreme depths but I assume dive computers have a battery so that can't be the case.

  25. #25
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Kent UK
    Posts
    2,440
    Quote Originally Posted by M4tt View Post
    And the same question can be asked of any dive watch that isn't quartz. Beyond that, I'd say Eddie has us covered:
    [Derail]

    @M4tt, which model of Precista is that? It looks great.

    [/Derail]

  26. #26
    Master shalako's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    4,483
    I believe the exact opposite of the OP, I think Omega are really upping their game with the latest range of Omega Seamaster’s, METAS, anti-magnetic and the overall quality feel seems better to me, I own a Rolex JC DSSD and the SD43 as well as the steel 1200m Ploprof and a METAS 43.5mm Planet Ocean which has the see through back and an impressive fully lumed bezel, for me it doesn’t make it any less ‘serious’ of a dive watch having the see through back, in fact it’s a bonus to see the quality of the movement when I have spent many thousands on a fine watch. I can’t honestly say I prefer one brand over another but at least with Omega I can actually buy the watch from my local AD without the angst that comes with buying a Rolex these days.

  27. #27
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    82
    I think Omega are very much in the business of selling watches and if a dressier approach to the design of their current range sells more product, then why not? They’re all very capable.

  28. #28
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by shalako View Post
    I believe the exact opposite of the OP, I think Omega are really upping their game with the latest range of Omega Seamaster’s, METAS, anti-magnetic and the overall quality feel seems better to me, I own a Rolex JC DSSD and the SD43 as well as the steel 1200m Ploprof and a METAS 43.5mm Planet Ocean which has the see through back and an impressive fully lumed bezel, for me it doesn’t make it any less ‘serious’ of a dive watch having the see through back, in fact it’s a bonus to see the quality of the movement when I have spent many thousands on a fine watch. I can’t honestly say I prefer one brand over another but at least with Omega I can actually buy the watch from my local AD without the angst that comes with buying a Rolex these days.
    I respect your opinion.

    Great line up you have. Seems like I just happen to not like details that are there just for exhibition. I would buy a Ploprof with a one piece case and no HEV in a heartbeat. All else remaining equal.

    Eg. I do not like the stepped chapter ring on my Pelagos. Serves no purpose in my eyes.

    As for buying Omega that is true. At least there are no games, lists, favours and paying the mafia.

  29. #29
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by estoban7 View Post
    I've never understood why any diver would use a mechanical watch instead of a more robust quartz. I used to think that maybe there was a possibility of batter failure at extreme depths but I assume dive computers have a battery so that can't be the case.
    A 7C46 would always be more shock resistant than anything mechanical, but generally a mechanical movement will be much more resistant, at least in the short term, to a small amount of moisture intrusion.

    That why it was crazy at the time for Seiko to throw a Quartz movement in a Professional dive watch in 1978.

  30. #30
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    12,336
    Blog Entries
    22
    You can get a closed case back edition of the Omega SMP if you want. I rather like this version. As regards Rolex Submariner running circles around Omega Seamaster Professional I don't think so, as they are both jewellery items - with at least one available.



    I have this one - it hardly leaves my watch box, for some reason I find it a bit.... boring (no offence).

    Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 28th September 2022 at 19:23.
    “ Ford... you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.” HHGTTG

  31. #31
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    cheshire
    Posts
    1,580
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    A 7C46 would always be more shock resistant than anything mechanical, but generally a mechanical movement will be much more resistant, at least in the short term, to a small amount of moisture intrusion.
    AHH that makes more sense now.

  32. #32
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    20,046
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    Ok let me answer your question with another question.

    How does a display back on a Professional dive watch improve its function?
    Ok let me answer your question with another question.

    How does a display back on a Professional dive watch impair its function?
    Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.

  33. #33
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by MartynJC (UK) View Post
    You can get a closed case back edition of the Omega SMP if you want. I rather like this version. As regards Rolex Submariner running circles around Omega Seamaster Professional I don't think so, as they are both jewellery items - with at least one available.



    I have this one - it hardly leaves my watch box, for some reason I find it a bit.... boring (no offence).

    Cracking pair.

    I love that SMP version. My only issue is the fauxtina. I also like the Nekton edition, but not sure about the bezel (subjective taste, nothing wrong).

    I really like your 124060M. One of my all time favourite watches I owned was a 14060M COSC. I later changed it for a 114060M for the clasp improvement but I never warmed up tot he maxi case. It always looked too 'boxy' for me.

    I think the 124060M is the perfect Submariner. Shame its RRP is now up to over 8K Euro, more of a shame, is that you can't even actually buy it.

  34. #34
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by oldoakknives View Post
    Ok let me answer your question with another question.

    How does a display back on a Professional dive watch impair its function?
    It simply introduces a new point of failure (glass/steel caseback ring interface). However unlikely that failure you think it might be.

  35. #35
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    cheshire
    Posts
    1,580
    A bit OT but I recall reading a post on here many years ago from a professional diver. He talked about most of his colleagues spending their first month's wages on Rolex Subs. However, most didn't use the Subs for actual diving, they preferred to use Seiko 6309s for that as they had better legibility under water.

    I can't be 100% certain but I think the person who made that post was Eddie.

  36. #36
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    14,535
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    It simply introduces a new point of failure (glass/steel caseback ring interface). However unlikely that failure you think it might be.
    Surely then anything but a Ploprof/MM300 monoblock case is an unnecessary compromise, too?


    M
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  37. #37
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    Surely then anything but a Ploprof/MM300 monoblock case is an unnecessary compromise, too?


    M
    I think you are misunderstanding this simple concept.

    No issue, let us agree to disagree.

    Last year I have even emailed Sinn for a 206 with a solid caseback. They didn't want to know.

  38. #38
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by estoban7 View Post
    A bit OT but I recall reading a post on here many years ago from a professional diver. He talked about most of his colleagues spending their first month's wages on Rolex Subs. However, most didn't use the Subs for actual diving, they preferred to use Seiko 6309s for that as they had better legibility under water.

    I can't be 100% certain but I think the person who made that post was Eddie.
    Very understandable. It would be much easier & cheaper to replace a 6309 than a Rolex Sub.

    At least those days they didn't have to pay twice retail :).

  39. #39
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    cheshire
    Posts
    1,580
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    Very understandable. It would be much easier & cheaper to replace a 6309 than a Rolex Sub.

    At least those days they didn't have to pay twice retail :).
    Very true, but I think the professional assessment of the poster was that the Seiko was the better tool watch regardless of cost.

  40. #40
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    14,535
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    I think you are misunderstanding this simple concept.

    No issue, let us agree to disagree.

    Last year I have even emailed Sinn for a 206 with a solid caseback. They didn't want to know.
    You just seem to dislike the idea of display backs.

    That's fine, your choice, but you're trying to make a justification for your opinion being a fact where it doesn't exist, imo.

    Happy to agree to disagree, but I still don't see where the issue lies as long as WR is retained and there doesn't seem to be much support for your argument here or elsewhere, from what I've seen.

    M
    Last edited by snowman; 29th September 2022 at 20:02.
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  41. #41
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by estoban7 View Post
    Very true, but I think the professional assessment of the poster was that the Seiko was the better tool watch regardless of cost.
    I wouldn't say so. I think they are both equally capable.

    A Tuna on the other hand, would be a different proposition.

  42. #42
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    You just seem to dislike the idea of display backs.

    That's fine, your choice, but you're trying to make a justification for your opinion being a fact where it doesn't exist, imo.

    Happy to agree to disagree, but I still don't see where the issue lies as long as WR is retained and there doesn't seem to be much support for your argument here or elsewhere, from what I've seen.

    M
    That's fine. You're right, I hate display casebacks on 'mission themed' pilot, divers, explorer style etc) watches.

    I simply wanted to know whether people think Omega will ever remake a like original Ploprof (sans He & one piece case) or a sub 41mm, slim SMP without a display back.

    I am not looking for everyone's approval.

  43. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post

    If you want a 'serious dive watch', you need to look away from luxury brands, imo.
    This
    Andy

    Wanted - Damasko DC57

  44. #44
    All i can say, is if I 'had' to choose which of these to dive with (not that I would), it'd be the one with the glass back.




  45. #45
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    20,046
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    It simply introduces a new point of failure (glass/steel caseback ring interface). However unlikely that failure you think it might be.
    No more likely than the glass/steel case interface on the dial tbh.
    Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.

  46. #46
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by tz-uk73 View Post
    All i can say, is if I 'had' to choose which of these to dive with (not that I would), it'd be the one with the glass back.



    I respect your POV.

    Nice watches!

    I really wish Omega does reissue this same bracelet again. It's not unlike the president bracelet on a Rolex or Seiko. I had one on an SKX and loved it.

  47. #47
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    14,535
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy13 View Post
    That's fine. You're right, I hate display casebacks on 'mission themed' pilot, divers, explorer style etc) watches.

    I simply wanted to know whether people think Omega will ever remake a like original Ploprof (sans He & one piece case) or a sub 41mm, slim SMP without a display back.

    I am not looking for everyone's approval.
    Great, at last.

    They might - They've already made a retro Speedmaster with a period correct movement, if they perceive there's demand for a Ploprof equally true to its original design, I can see them doing it.

    On the other hand, the Ploprof is a very niche watch, which I presume has a limited market (although if rumours of a stainless steel, no date version are true, perhaps I'm wrong), and if they do make it, it will, like that Speedmaster, probably be very expensive.

    M
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  48. #48
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Malta (Europe)
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    Great, at last.

    They might - They've already made a retro Speedmaster with a period correct movement, if they perceive there's demand for a Ploprof equally true to its original design, I can see them doing it.

    On the other hand, the Ploprof is a very niche watch, which I presume has a limited market (although if rumours of a stainless steel, no date version are true, perhaps I'm wrong), and if they do make it, it will, like that Speedmaster, probably be very expensive.

    M
    I really, really like the new Speedmaster. The bracelet is killer and I think the taper on it is superb.

    I am shocked at the prices really. Just a few short years ago you could buy a gently used one for 2K.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information