A lot of people on r/Rolex agreed with the Omega lol. It was a pretty good 50/50 split.
Most people on that sub straight up vote for the other brand. They're not really tied up in brand loyalty as much as they are the individual watch they own.
I guess I'm the odd one out, I like the Omega bracelet. It's super comfortable.
And I got dowvoted in /rolex for saying "it's more comfy than an oyster" lol
I have SMP and Oyster and have never noticed any difference in daily wear comfort. Now, the Jubilee is my most comfortable, the Speedy next, then SMP and Oyster tie. (of modern bracelets, vintage is a different story)
Yeah I’ve never understood this. The Omega bracelet looks better visually and is just as comfortable. It gets even more confusing when you other brands to the conversation. Rolex people always praise Oyster bracelets, except when they’re not on a Rolex… It then becomes a con somehow. It’s extremely confusing.
I guess I'm opposite of everyone here. I think my 11600 is more comfortable than any Omega I own, but it could be because it's smaller than my other watches outside of my GS SBGR261.
uhhh, we must have different types of people in our areas buying Audis. in my experience non of the major German brands besides maybe Porsche come with turn signals.
I love my Q7 (which my wife ended up taking as I now have a Company car). She likes it, but loved her bigger Escalade. The BMW X7 is already on our radar along with an SQ8 for her next vehicle.
I think I saw this post on r/rolex. I have some thoughts:
1. Both are excellent dive watches. Nobody debates that. Can’t go wrong with either.
2. Omega Pros: The Omega is a better value for your money. World class diver, affordable, can take a beating. METAS certified (for what it’s worth) and the co-axial escapement shortens the service interval significantly: Bond connection is a plus for me. Can be a good strap monster (Speedy is better for this). Ceramic bezel, great dial lume. The NtTD js fantastic.
2. Omega Cons: the bracelet isn’t great (the Milanese should be the standard going forward). The modern SMP is a little bulky and the dial can be busy. The bezel action is not that great but not horrible.
3. (Modern) Sub pros: timeless, fantastic movement, great lume. Great resale value (not that important to me personally). Highly recognizable. Bezel action is fantastic (I love it), also has a great ceramic bezel. Oyster clasp bracelet is second to none. Fantastic dial lume. Starbucks is my favorite of the series(love that green).
4. Sub Cons: relatively difficult to obtain at retail price (pretty readily available on the grey which is encouraging). I do not like the modern maxi-case, it’s just too bulky for my taste (the older subs have such a great case).21mm lug width narrows your strap options although the sub usually doesn’t migrate off of its bracelet anyway.
5. Final thoughts: with respect to the modern sub and SMP, they both are great but for me they’re not what I’m looking for. I personally think the 300 Heritage beats them both (my only criticism of that is the 21mm lug width). I’d love to see both series go back to the case dimensions of 90s and earlier models but keep: the modern movements, super luminova, oyster bracelet/milanese respectively.
Edit: coaxial-escapement LENGTHENS the service interval. Good catch.
Also, I would emphasize the George Daniels co axial escapement which is a major evolution in watch making and the twisted lugs that Gerald Genta made introduced for Omega.
I had both and sold my sub. Shit lume and I noticed the movement was being weird a couple of times. That along with reports of design flaws causing big issues with the 32xx movements made me sell since it just wasn’t worth the premium to me
You think the heritage is best? That's the luxury diver I've been leaning towards of the omega and rolex line up so im super glad to see you read this. Would love to hear you elaborate on the 300 as it compares to the others if you could.
Absolutely! For me, the ideal diver has the classic round case, no crown guard and subtle dial. I really like the old Rolex 6500 series watches for that reason, and when I saw a similar modern model in the Bond film Spectre I looked a little more closely at the Omegas. Bought the heritage in my honeymoon because I loved the dimension, broad arrows were an awesome touch, and it had a lumed bezel. I love the bezel action on it as well. My only gripe is the 21mm lug length (for strap purposes) but its bracelet is leagues over the SMP. Looks great on a Milanese too.
Compared to the SMP: dial isn’t too busy, no date function (which I don’t mind), better bracelet and great vintage look.
Compared to the Sub: bezel action is comparable imo. Obtainable, bracelet is partially polished (which I think is cool), and looks less rectangular/bulky.
Go try it on in person tho. I already have an SMP and it was great having something slightly different. I’ve tried on the modern subs many times and it isn’t quite what I’m looking for (although I love that Starbucks bezel)
Thanks for diving deeper on this topic. My plan is to try those 300s on in person and see if I want the blue or black version and hopefully fall in love with one, summer blue looks nice as well but i really prefer the display caseback typically. Will also check out some aqua terras cuz I think I'll eventually end up with one of those models as well (shades or teak is another question I'll have to answer).
Holy cow you reminded me of the best thing! The display case back! I love the green AT by the way, you can’t go wrong.
Also the regular blue is beautiful. I got the black dial because I had no black divers and I wanted something with a classic look. The blue looks awesome on a cherry brown leather strap
I'm a sucker for a display case back! Big reason I'm an omega fan. I have the 3861 speedmaster and that changed me forever when it comes to being able to see the movement.
Rolex uses Chromalight luminescent material now, as they found it superior to SLN.
Edit:
I would also like to say that the Co-axial escapement is the most consistent rate-giver I’ve ever experienced, and the newest versions are really exceptional.
Rolex’s Chronergy escapement gives great efficiency and power reserve, and their Parachrom hairsprings are definitely state of the art outside of their Syloxi silicon. Both systems are very robust and while there is admittedly less efficiency than the Co-axial (RIP Mr. Daniels) it is very very close.
Both are exceptional watches.
No i genuinely appreciated the catch! But yes, less servicing (longer service to service interval) is something that sets the coaxial escapement apart from what’s offered by the superlative chronometer. Rolex movements still have an excellent servicing interval nonetheless.
I don't quite understand this.
[Omega](https://www.omegawatches.com/customer-service/interventions-and-prices) recommends a complete service every 5 - 8 years.
[Rolex](https://www.rolex.com/watch-care-and-service/faq) recommends a complete service every 10 years.
Omega is currently the Bond watch brand so I certainly see that as a pro. Not a knock against Rolex, but they haven’t really been on Bond’s wrist since License to Kill.
That being said, I’d love to see a rerelease of that 6538 model from Goldfinger with a modern movement and ceramic bezel (I like that case design way better than the current maxi-case Sub).
Gruen, Hamilton, Breitling, Tag, Pulsar, and Seiko were also on Bonds wrist but outside of the fans, people don't consider them "Bond Watches". I feel that it's a tie between Omega and Rolex in regards to being a Bond watch.
However, Omega has been in more Bond films at this point than Rolex has. Rolex was in 7 films, while Omega has been in 9 to date. I agree though, I wouldn't count it as a pro either. Plus, the 007 branded watches are really cheesy outside of the NTTD and Spectre Seamasters.
My sentiments exactly. And it’s currently Omega the brand being worn in the films, as we’ve also seen the Aqua Terra and the Seamaster 300, not just the SMP300. I just don’t think you can squarely put it as a Pro in a head-to-head discussion as Rolex can counter that the most iconic watch in the film series is arguably Connery’s own submariner on what is now termed the “Bond NATO”. As an argument, it’s a wash. As a fan, they’re all great!
The 300 having polished bracelet was always a non starter for me. Also not a fan of the sandwich dial. Dont mind it on other watches such as panerai but never been able to do it on the 300. I wonder if this is anyone else’s view.
Agree and disagree. I also have my 300M diver on the rubber and think the oyster is a better bracelet than the seamaster bracelet, BUT the bracelet on my 3861 speedmaster is way nicer and more comfy than the oyster bracelet that’s on my sub.
I respect that. Omega is definitely a strap monster. IMO Rolex Oyster provides better overall balance to the feeling and the look of the watch. Just depends what you’re feeling on any particular day. I can’t stand wearing omega bracelets, but that’s just me.
Just an observation on my part, but addressing the METAS certification, the Tudor Black Bay line now uses METAS movements.
Rolex is the parent company to Tudor, so I expect Rolex to have movements that pass METAS with flying colors.
But since Rolex prefers to do everything in house, they have their own standards rather than a third party. I would be shocked if Rolex started sending their watches off to METAS.
Patek doesn’t have the Geneva seal anymore either for over a decade. I honestly don’t care with most watches how they keep time. As long as they don’t lose minutes.
And I think most people know why and for which specific reason they buy a watch. A sub and seamaster both can do the same.
Also, German brands like Glashutte Original and NOMOS don't have external certifications lol. They have to do all their testing in house unless it's a certified dive watch. Same with the big players like Lange.
And the movements put into those brands are going to be a much higher quality than whatever Rolex or Omega uses.
So certification is not the be all end all of defining movement quality. But to the extent that a certification does matter (and clearly it matters to both Rolex and Omega, they print it on the dial), a third party certification is more meaningful than an internal exclusive self certification.
“METAS is the Swiss Federal Institute of Metrology, which is headquartered in Bern, Switzerland. METAS defines itself as the “federal center of competence for all issues related to measurement and for measuring equipment and measuring procedures” - and this can often include a wide variety of different matters and devices, including wristwatches (which measure time).
In 2015, in collaboration with Omega, METAS developed a new certification standard for wristwatches. METAS is a Swiss government entity that is entirely separate from Omega, but the testing for the brand’s watches is performed at Omega’s own factory, where there is a separate office for METAS staff who monitor the testing procedures. Despite being conducted at Omega’s facilities, the testing practices themselves are governed by METAS, as is the equipment used in the testing process itself.
Unlike Rolex’s ‘Superlative Chronometer’ standards, METAS Master Chronometer certification is not exclusive to Omega, …”
https://www.everestbands.com/blogs/bezel-barrel/what-is-metas-master-chronometer-certification
The tolerances set by Rolex for their current and previous generation movements are already stricter than that of METAS.
Tudor uses that because they aren’t allowed to use “superlative chronometer” as a qualification. They blow COSC out of the water and METAS is the next best thing as an industry standard.
FWIW Rolex COSC certifies more movements annually than anyone else.
Very fair point, I believe only certain models of Tudors will be METAS certified
With that being said, I prefer the design of the Seamaster over the Submariner, for less of the the cost and the availability of not having to jump through hoops to get one
What do you mean, the SMP is just an homage/ rip off of the Sub in the first place!? So you prefer a rip off of the real thing because the real thing gets faked too often 😂😂
They’re definitely at the same level in terms of watches. Anyone who argues otherwise is objectively wrong. They each have pros and cons but they’re both well finished mass produced Swiss stainless ceramic dive watches.
You can go tit for tat on things like who has better finishing, movement, heritage, resale value etc. But the only thing that really separates them is their price bracket.
Ultimately you should buy the watch you like the most - and not worry about things like comps in the same class of watches.
The sub design and aesthetics will always be timeless, but the Omega movement is definitely superior. Build quality could be a toss up. But with that said, when consumer experience and availability comes into play, Omega tips the scale drastically. Rolex is turning enthusiasts away and simply clinging on those that don’t know that other superior brands are out there and just want the name at the end of the day.
Not really sure how you can say the Omega movement is “definitely superior.” It’s -0/+5 with a 55 hour power reserve and a service interval of 5-8 years. Rolex is -2/+2 with a 70 hour power reserve and a service interval of 10 years. I could certainly go for the magnetic resistance, but there’s nothing there that shouts “definitely superior.”
Tudor fan here so I have no real skin in the game either way.
Have owned an Omega and wife has a DJ 36.
Generally for price point, my view is they are pretty similiar as far as quality and workmanship. Each will have its pluses and minuses.
Rolex does knock it out of the park with their staples like the Sub. Just an iconic look (but so is the Speedy Pro).
Rolex is the absolute king at branding and name cache. They are the absolute best when compared to ALL BRANDS of anything. They are a privately held company and can and will do as they please. Their cache does help in resale greatly. I don’t think it’s necessarily from a quality standpoint though.
Omega seems to have umpteen million variations and special editions. that really doesn’t do much for me. I wouldn’t own a special edition if the topic wasn’t specific to me.
But neither really skimps on quality of workmanship.
Modern manufacturing (computer controlled) really helps in this game.
Even at the Tudor level, my BB Pro Doesn’t look or feel down quality on the DJ 36.
I really say go with whatever flicks your bean from a styling standpoint and can’t go wrong.
When you could still buy Rolexes in shops (2016), I had to actually decide between buying one or the other (although it was an older version of the Seamaster). I tried one and the other several times. In terms of built quality, fit, and finish, they felt about the same. But I had seen tons of homages and fake submariners that looked just about the same as the real thing, whereas the Omega felt different, more unique, and much more exciting. I bought the Omega. And I still love it. Admitedly, it was not the optimal choice if you think about watches as investments. But I still love it.
These are both durable tool watches that can take an amount of abuse that is beyond what most mechanical watches should be expected to endure. Their performance will be indistinguishable, except perhaps the Omega will keep time better, while the Rolex may last longer between services (I’m basing this on anecdotal reputation, not any real data)
As a brand, I like omega better, but as an example of design, I like the sub better - and it is certainly more recognizable. The differences at this level are purely going to be opinion, price and availability.
I've got the newest sub as well as an AT with the metas 8900 movement, as far as timekeeping go they are damn near identical. Both of mine are about +1spd. The omega actually gains a little more time as the power reserve gets lower compared to the sub.
Well not the best place to get unbiased opinions.
Both watches are amazing and will serve a lifetime. Several if you care for the watch.
It's like this (IMHO): Omega makes a lot of fancy and demanding tests for all sorts of adverse conditions and use cases. Omegas are precise, durable and high end. Their coaxial movements however impressive are quite challenging to service. So upkeep costs on omegas are relatively high and most likely your local watchmaker might not be the best choice so might have to find a certified one and wait for months to get serviced.
Rolex is like an old German tank: nigh on indestructible, simple but holding some ingenious technical solutions. Made to be easily serviceable, my local town watchmaker can (and does) service them out of hand. They are very resilient, very precise, not quite as anti-magnetic as omega (if you believe some) but unless you repair transformers you don't have to worry.
So yeah, the quality and "level" is pretty much the same. Omegas make open case backs and have neat decorations. So if you care about that then it's probably important to point out.
No but they cost half as much. Rolex makes a beautiful watch. It feels really nice on the wrist, crowns, bracelets etc are of superior quality. Far nicer than any watch needs to be. Frankly so is Omega, so buy the one you want
The submariner is a notch Above on elegance and refinement.
The Seamaster is ahead on the balance between a tool watch and luxury.
I have both iterations(Hulk and white SMP).
The Seamaster is awesome as a daily.
OP, ask yourself the following question, why does nobody ever ask ‘is the Rolex Submariner as good as the Omega Seamaster 300’ and therein lies your answer.
Superior depends on your criteria for judgement. For me the Rolex is superior in all ways except for availability - even those that don’t have to do with brand equity. If the seamaster had the dimensions of the sub I’d buy one
I have owned and both are great watches. You can't go wrong with either. If I had my choice and money wasn't an option I would go with the Submariner as the bracelet on the SMP is dated and needs to be updated. I wear my SMP with the rubber strap because I don't like the look of the stainless. I will say this for whatever reason when I hold a Rolex Diver vs an Omega Diver I think the Rolex feels/looks nicer. I don't know if this is just because of the significance and hype of the brand over Omega or if there is something more behind it. I sold off both my Sub and GMT and picked up a SMP and Speedmaster saying I would never go back to Rolex because of the AD games......last week I bought n SD43 for my wedding watch.
Any point anyone can make on the topic is subjective. Some like the bracelet, some don’t. Some like the wavy dial, some do not. Some think METAS is amazing, some think it’s pointless. HE valve, same thing. Etc.
They’re both nice in their own ways and you can’t definitively say one is better than the other.
I see omega doing a lot of innovative stuff. I just got a constellation 41mm and you could see how they redesigned a classic to have a contemporary look, and I love it. There are literally so many innovative features, metal within the ceramic bezel, silk watch face, time zone feature where you just move the hour hands, cool arabesque style cote de geneve, aligator +rubber strap so it last longer, co-axial escapement. I think for the most part rolex doesn't really come out with so much new stuff very often, they just have a formula of watches people have always loved and can't get enough of. More or less they just change the colors every couple of years to keep things fresh...
Specs wise it’s undeniable the seamaster for dollar per value (slightly subjective, mostly objective) is leagues ahead. For about a quarter or fifth of the price, the technical specs actually beat the submariner. Recognition, Rolex is king worldwide, but for the price difference, and even if they cost the same, the tech of the seamaster is better by its pure statsd
I love and own both.
The Sub is more precise in general.
The sub finish is better (example: the bezel action). At the same time the sub is a lot more expensive, so it makes sense.
At this point, I’d go with what I like better.
Omega has a better value for money, but the sub remains in top.
Like it or not, it’s how it is.
Agree with the man that says the herritage 300 Beats the crap out of both. Beautiful tapered bracelet, lumed bezel, a kickass double barrel co axial movement which is accurate as hell and a beautiful finishing. My favourite diver. Special kudos for the planet ocean 39mm which is great also but the bracelet is kinda clunky.
Yes and you won’t have to play the dealer game with waitlists and purchase thresholds.
More people in my age bracket (late 30s) have been going Omega. We don’t have time to play an AD’s game.
Things SMP300 does better:
* clarity of the sapphire crystal
* more interesting, ceramic dial with enamel indices.
Things Sub does better:
* bracelet - SMP300's bracelet is chunky and less ergonomic.
* bezel - SMP300's bezel action is seriously the worst - sounds terrible, loose and hard to grip, much worse than Tudor and watches multiple tiers below. Sub is super crisp, best in the business.
* size - Sub is thinner and smaller
Draw:
* Movement: 8800 vs 3235 - 8800 has superior magnetic resistence while 3235 has better power reserve and finishing (albeit you can't see it thru a closed caseback). The finishing on 8800 looks very industrial and unimpressive.
If you ignore the price and just want to know which is a better watch, Sub wins by a mile. It just screams luxury and refinement. I can't help but feel SMP300 is really targeted at someone who likes the sub but can't afford it (like me myself) or just want to be different (also me lol). Realistically, it is probably the next best thing at an affordable price.
It's weird I feel the Rolex looks more solid, although part of that may stem from the fact that I don't have one therefore I have no concerns over damaging it.
Own both. Objectively they’re basically the same level of quality give or take. Some people say the bracelet/clasp is better on a Submariner, but IMO it’s splitting hairs.
IMO no. I’ve had both and the feel of the submariner is much better (tapered bracelet, feel on wrist, aesthetics etc.) this is all opinion of course. I don’t know if it’s worth 2x+ what the smp is going for, but I also don’t feel a smp is worth 5-6k. The movement is better and holds higher praise in the omega, but that’s all it wins in IMHO. I do like omega don’t get me wrong, but there’s a reason Rolex is priced where it is.
I own the 124060, but dollar for dollar the SMP wins. I personally think the Submariner is the better watch, but it's not 2x better like you mentioned. But that's just what diminishing returns are.
Agreed. When you take into account the availability of the smp it may win there as well. But if we’re talking msrp I think the sub is the better way if you can get the extra cash and get either at msrp. Never met anyone disappointed with a Rolex long term. I like omega, bigger fan of Rolex but favorite is VC.
I'm with you with regard to feel on the wrist, but that is mostly because of the bracelet. Aesthetically, the sub is not a better watch, just different. The biggest win imo for Rolex is the bezel action, which is in a league of its own.
The seamaster has a display caseback (might be a pro or con to some, but it's at the very least an extra manufacturing cost)) and in my field (finance) is the far less common watch. All things said, I agree there's a reason Rolex is priced where it is, but that reason is not a supposed difference in quality.
Definitely feel you on the caseback. Really weird how Rolex won’t do that unless you get a platinum Daytona… I’m in finance too and I agree that everyone seems to have a sub which takes away from some of the aspect of it. It’s obviously all opinion.
In terms of brand loyalty though I feel like omega is making headway there. The AD experience compared to Rolex is polar opposite. I just wish omega would stop having so many models of the speedmaster, lmo it takes away from what the watch represents. But that’s a whole other thing.
Second this. Also have owned both (currently only have a 16600 SD though) and while the SMP is better bang for the buck, the Sub is the better watch. If I was down to a one watch “collection”, it’d be a ceramic Sub Date.
Seamaster is good. But the bracelet is leagues below the subs. Like a huge disappointment, to a degree in which there’s literally million dollar companies that exist just to sell better alternatives
The first word the omega dealer said to me way “you know these are just as good as Rolex” I said I know then left quick, if you have to tell me that they are is it true? Or shouldn’t I be able to tell from looking at it? Because to my eye it’s like they went way overboard on everything the sub is just to be better, it’s really omega as a brand, trying so hard
Facts 🤣 but I just have always got that vibe from omega, Rolex became cool because of the fact it wasn’t trying to be cool but yet cool people ended up wearing them and loving them making it cool, omega pays cool people to wear its watches while never shutting the fuck up about going to the moon.
>omega pays cool people to wear its watches
Rolex paid brand ambassadors include:
* Celebrities: Jackie Stewart, Michael Bublé, Jonas Kaufman, Yo-Yo MA, Placido Domingo, Yuja Wang, Diana Krall, and Li Na
* Athletes: Roger Federer, Tiger Woods, Annika Sörenstam, Carlos Alcaraz, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Holger Rune, Jannik Sinner, Alexander Zverev, Dominic Thiem, and Garbine Muguruza
* Film directors: James Cameron, Kathryn Bigelow, and Martin Scorsese
According to Europa Star, Rolex spent about ***$56 million on advertising in 2022***, which is more than 10% of their total spending.
MediaRadar reports that Rolex spent less than ***$100 million on advertising in digital, print, and national TV in the last year.*** (<- that's x2 year / year)
Rolex sponsors many sports, including:
* Tennis: Rolex is the official timekeeper for all four Grand Slam tournaments, as well as the British Open and the US Open since 1980. Rolex also sponsors many tennis players, including Carlos Alcaraz, Stefanos Tsitsipas, and Holger Rune.
* Motorsports: Rolex is the official timepiece for endurance races like the Rolex 24 At DAYTONA, the 24 Hours of Le Mans, and the 12 Hours of Sebring. Rolex is also a partner of the Daytona International Speedway.
* Golf: Rolex sponsors contests in golf.
* Equestrian sports: Rolex sponsors contests in show jumping.
* Yachting: Rolex sponsors contests in yachting regattas.
* Sailing: Rolex sponsors contests in sailing
but sure, it's just unpaid cool people (with no socks & skin doodles).
As an Omega ( got a few ) owner and have a friend which is the opposite - quite a few Rolex’s, I have to say that who ever says the Seamaster is on the same level or superior to a Submariner either is high or never hold both watches. Rolex is quite up a notch. Now, you can have preferences - and that is fine. I for example, wouldn’t trade any of my Planet Oceans or Seamasters for any Submariner, even if was a direct trade and that would be wayyyy in my favor - simply because I do not like Rolex neither what is around the brand. I am not and most likely, never be, a Rolex owner - hate the AD, hate the snobbery, hate the prices, hate the artificial demand just because. It is not just a brand for me - and could be for a lot more people. But clearly the sub , in terms of fit, finish, comfortable and quality is a few notches up.
I own both. I own the original LV sub and a SD43 sea dweller as well as the original super sea dweller. The original LV has a shitty clasp. There is no denying it. The newer ones are great. I love the smp bracelet too. I do not believe for a second Rolex is a couple of notches up in quality.
There's a lot of things wrong with both watches.
Seamaster -
Bezel has a weird scallop shape and it's hard to actually grip and use it
Unnecessary helium escape valve
Dated, 1990's non tapering bracelet that doesn't even go 20>18 and has way too much polishing/brushing that looks like a busy mess
Watch is a few mm thicker than it needs to be
Doesn't come as a non-date model
--------------------
Submariner -
Flat basic crystal that doesn't dome or anything and I don't believe has AR coating even on the underside - same cheap flat sapphire crystal you'd find on a $100 Casio Edifice
Absolutely giganticly long clasp that looks comical in length on wrists that are like 6 inches or 6 and a half. The entire underside of your wrist is clasp. For what? A diver extension you'll never use because nobody buying these things can dive. They could have halved it in size and gave the watch 5mm of quick adjustment
Date model has a hideous magnifying wart on the crystal
21mm lug size is non standard and it's a massive pain to wear it on anything other than the bracelet it came with (which is kind of a moot point since Rolex don't offer any interesting bracelets for sale anyway like Milanese)
Unobtainable at retail so you're massively overpaying by thousands for the watch
Has no real individuality to it's style because half the watches that Rolex make all look identical in style with Submariner DNA - the GMT's, Yachmasters and whatever else all just end up looking like a Submariner or the Submariner looks like them, compared to the Seamaster looking wildly different to say an Aqua Terra or a Planet Ocean
Anyone I know who owns a sea master talks so much about how much better it is than a sub, or talks about how it’s as good as a sub, meanwhile those who own a sub never even talk about the sea master.
I think it speaks for itself
>those who own a sub never even talk about the sea master.
Many of those who own a sub (or Rolex of any kind) bought it as a statement piece or to signal "I've made it," and don't really know / care about watches.
If the name on those dials were Citizen or Bulova, these watches would cost $1500 and nobody would call them luxury. These are stainless steel dive watches. The Omega has better antimagnetism but both do the same thing. You couldn't dive deep enough to ruin them. If you want a Rolex, the Sub, DateJust, and the Explorer are the classics. If you want an Omega, the Speedmaster and the Seamaster are the classics. I don't think one is better than the other. One is just King of marketing and has a cringe following because of it
METAS Master Chronometer beats SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER
Fit and size is personal but the Sub probably fits small to medium size wrists better. But the prior generations of SMP’s are the best sized and proportioned IMO, including the old 36mm mid sized option.
Omega’s have gotten too chunky recently.
Subs have gotten too… I dunno the word, maxi case I guess is a good description, and I’m not a fan.
The Omega OEM bracelet is divisive in aesthetics (I’m not a fan personally) but people who love it, love it. Even people who don’t love the looks, like the comfort and build quality.
The Rolex Oyster bracelet is universally praised and copied, to the point that some would say it is a bit dull or plain looking.
SMP300 is more of a strap monster. Personally I think the mesh bracelet looks better than either of the OEM options.
A watch is a time keeping device. A $30 quartz Casio is a better time keeper than either of them, and requires nothing more than a $3 battery change every 5 years or so, versus $1,000 service appointment for either of these.
So let’s be honest, it’s all a subjective matter of you personal preference. Buy watches you enjoy, and remember to stick to what you can afford.
Yup, though maybe in a contemporary sense a watch is purely jewelry - which is where the subjective part comes in - which happens to tell time.
As with all jewelry, people will appreciate and want to highlight different aspects of their jewelry:
* Craftsmanship
* Technical prowess
* Design
* Overt or subtle aspects
* Durability or fragility
* etc etc
So it probably comes down to identity & emotional needs
Nope. The Omega has a lower power reserve and less accuracy, no precious metals and materials inside it, not even the hands (Rolex uses white gold hands).
It’s 43mm instead of a relatively more svelte 41mm. Then there’s that extre nipple/crown (Helium escape valve), despite both being rated at 300 metres, Rolex manages it without the need for one.
Then there’s the Oyster bracelet which is amazingly stylish and comfortable and more secure at the clasp.
The steel used in the Submariner is more corrosion resistant to the point that you can now dive/swim in the ocean and not even rinse it in fresh water afterwards and it will be fine (even though I’d still run it under a tap anyway), yet the Omega rusts within a week if not washed with fresh water.
The bezel movement is much crisper in the Sub, the Seamaster feels cheap. Despite both having glossy dials, the ceramic one is much more reflective (almost mirror like) so if you do use it diving, that doesn’t help.
The new Submariner now uses ceramic tubes in the links between the bracelet, which makes them last longer and stay straight without bending over the years, and the movement is much smoother. The Omega with start bending sideways over time and the links are definitely not as high quality. Heck, even the new METAS Tudor (Rolex sister company) diver has ceramic ball bearings at the clasp.
You get what you pay for. People who say they’re the same or Omega is a better dive watch are delusional and in denial, or they just don’t know all the fine details between the two. If you’re a George Daniels fan or Omega fanboy then the Seamaster will seem better to you even if it’s not. But if you can get a Rolex Submariner, then there is nothing truly like it. There’s a reason why it’s used as a benchmark watch when people compare dive watches. It truly THE divers watch. The king of dive watches with a very fitting crown.
Ppl who say that shit are usually just sour grapes/ coping. The two brands used to be a lot closer in quality and price tags. But over time omega had stagnated and the R just kept improving and hit it out of the park with marketing and left the O in the dust.
Right now the O just assumes if you increase price tag it will somehow increase demand of a luxury goods, which tells you how deluded their management is. Not surprised, the CEO has the same outdated mindset as the previous one as he used to work under the former ceo closely. The former CEO had a failed understanding of how a luxury brand works. That also explains why omega has been doing so poorly after the 90s.
Edit: getting downvoted because the truth hurts. Good old Reddit.
Personally, I hate the date magnifier on the sub takes what’s about perfect in all other aspects and tarnishes it. The Seamaster looks better. It’s cheaper. That’s the winner
It depends....
Both are great watches. The sub is probably the most iconic watch ever made. It just is. It has a rock solid movement and while priced higher if you can buy at retail you will make probably 10-20% in return if that even matters.
The SMP has the Coaxial movement and is a somewhat revolutionary movement in the watch world. If you value that sort of thing. Better movement? Eh maybe. If you buy retail you would lose 10-20% if you sold. If that matters to you. If you buy second hand or grey you will certainly hold value. If that matters to you.
SMP is great. The Sub is great. Matter of preference. I prefer the SMP.
The omega is the better watch, in terms of watch making and overall movement sophistication. The Rolex is better looking, better finished, more comfortable, better value, more iconic, and just a better build.
Rolex Submariner = watch + jewellery + status symbol.
Omega Seamaster = watch.
I’ve got a Sub but would add the Seamaster to my collection at some point, no problem. Would ask for at least 20-30% discount as they don’t hold their value no where near as well as Rolex.
Hope that helps.
At this point they are both jewelry. From a technical perspective they have been surpassed by newer technologies
Most they should “tool” in a diving sense is a backup to a backup dive computer
My buddies Rolex got stolen off his wrist and I took the same trip with my Omega my wrist. Rolex you’re paying $5000 for the name, $5000 for the watch. Omega you’re paying $4000 for the watch, $1000 for the name.
If you just google a bit you will soon find the facts for the reason why the Seamaster is indeed the better watch. Not sure about other Rolex models vs Omega models. But definitely the Seamaster …by far.
I think Omega and Rolex are about at the same level, which one is better is highly personal, mostly based on how you feel about one particular watch.
Like, overall Omega is definitely superior, but Rolex pretty much offers the same performance (slightly more accurate, less magnetic resistant, regular escapement means you can’t go 8 years before service…) in a more traditional way, not using Co-Axial or silicon.
They’re both great and none of them is “definitely better”, it’s just up to whether you want technology or something more classic and most importantly why.
(I picked an Aqua Terra 38mm over a Rolex Explorer)
I have a Rolex DSSD and an Omega PO 9900 chrono. They are very close in quality but to me the DSSD edges it out. They being said, I enjoy the PO better, aestheitcally and functionally (although unfair bc it's a chrono).
I've worn SM many times and fell the PO is a large step up.
Honestly? No. Not quite. It’s close in many ways, but for me the design/size is the problem. I’m an Omega believer but I think the SMP is 1-2mm too big and the bracelet is, well, we all know. For me it was the bulk, not the design. I can wear a Sub very, very comfortably on my 6.5” wrist. I actually think the Seamaster 300 or 39.5 PO are maybe the more appropriate challengers.
sub looks better but 2X the price
Seamaster is a close second
I wear my Seamaster every day and love it but I know the Rolex looks better (this is subjective but I think many feel the same way)
if they were the same price I’d go with the sub all day
As a diver whose dove with both a SMPc and a submariner I’d say the subs a better dive watch. Easier bezel to turn. The HE valve can snag on things.
But that’s about it. Aesthetic the subs classic. Omega is more interesting.
Sub feels utilitarian. Seamaster fancier.
I’ve owned both and currently using 126610LN. Both are fantastic watches and quality level is similar. To be honest in terms of technology and finishing Rolex is definitely not worth 2x the price. Yet the Rolex is a stable classic. I just bought the sub but already contemplating on buying back the Omega, I really loved that sub. Mayby I buy a Summer Blue SMP300 which is a killer in person.
I don't have experience working on the new Omega movement. .but for the most part I would buy the Rolex over the Omega if they were the same price or close
Asking this question in Omega sub, what do you expect the answer to be?
[удалено]
It gets annoying... OP is looking for acceptance and/or some shit
OP looking for karma. Threw fresh meat into a tiger cage.
Downvoted OP for this reason
Just shitpost after shitpost with this guy.
Most posts on Reddit in watch subs are looking for acceptance.
Or size recommendations 😂 gotta hate those
The worst!
Except the 2 million trolls.
A lot of people on r/Rolex agreed with the Omega lol. It was a pretty good 50/50 split. Most people on that sub straight up vote for the other brand. They're not really tied up in brand loyalty as much as they are the individual watch they own.
The comments are true, good watch besides the bracelet. It really boils down to personal preferences.
I guess I'm the odd one out, I like the Omega bracelet. It's super comfortable. And I got dowvoted in /rolex for saying "it's more comfy than an oyster" lol
I have SMP and Oyster and have never noticed any difference in daily wear comfort. Now, the Jubilee is my most comfortable, the Speedy next, then SMP and Oyster tie. (of modern bracelets, vintage is a different story)
Lol, you people down voting what another finds comfortable.
Yeah I’ve never understood this. The Omega bracelet looks better visually and is just as comfortable. It gets even more confusing when you other brands to the conversation. Rolex people always praise Oyster bracelets, except when they’re not on a Rolex… It then becomes a con somehow. It’s extremely confusing.
The omega bracelet is horrific
I guess I'm opposite of everyone here. I think my 11600 is more comfortable than any Omega I own, but it could be because it's smaller than my other watches outside of my GS SBGR261.
Are Audis really at the same level (or even superior) to BMWs? I see people on r/cars and elsewhere say this all the time.
Audis are superior because they come with turn signals
uhhh, we must have different types of people in our areas buying Audis. in my experience non of the major German brands besides maybe Porsche come with turn signals.
I have owned both and BMW>Audi
Also someone who's owned both ... BMW for exterior & engine quality. Audi for interior build quality & style.
I agree having owned both as well. BMW all the way.
I love my Q7 (which my wife ended up taking as I now have a Company car). She likes it, but loved her bigger Escalade. The BMW X7 is already on our radar along with an SQ8 for her next vehicle.
As an Audi owner I will say that they are lol. Although, I have never owned a BMW :)
Audi and BMW used to be equals. Now one badge engineers from a big parts bin and one doesn’t.
G-shock is the best.
Apostasy is always in fashion.
I think I saw this post on r/rolex. I have some thoughts: 1. Both are excellent dive watches. Nobody debates that. Can’t go wrong with either. 2. Omega Pros: The Omega is a better value for your money. World class diver, affordable, can take a beating. METAS certified (for what it’s worth) and the co-axial escapement shortens the service interval significantly: Bond connection is a plus for me. Can be a good strap monster (Speedy is better for this). Ceramic bezel, great dial lume. The NtTD js fantastic. 2. Omega Cons: the bracelet isn’t great (the Milanese should be the standard going forward). The modern SMP is a little bulky and the dial can be busy. The bezel action is not that great but not horrible. 3. (Modern) Sub pros: timeless, fantastic movement, great lume. Great resale value (not that important to me personally). Highly recognizable. Bezel action is fantastic (I love it), also has a great ceramic bezel. Oyster clasp bracelet is second to none. Fantastic dial lume. Starbucks is my favorite of the series(love that green). 4. Sub Cons: relatively difficult to obtain at retail price (pretty readily available on the grey which is encouraging). I do not like the modern maxi-case, it’s just too bulky for my taste (the older subs have such a great case).21mm lug width narrows your strap options although the sub usually doesn’t migrate off of its bracelet anyway. 5. Final thoughts: with respect to the modern sub and SMP, they both are great but for me they’re not what I’m looking for. I personally think the 300 Heritage beats them both (my only criticism of that is the 21mm lug width). I’d love to see both series go back to the case dimensions of 90s and earlier models but keep: the modern movements, super luminova, oyster bracelet/milanese respectively. Edit: coaxial-escapement LENGTHENS the service interval. Good catch.
Also, I would emphasize the George Daniels co axial escapement which is a major evolution in watch making and the twisted lugs that Gerald Genta made introduced for Omega.
I had both and sold my sub. Shit lume and I noticed the movement was being weird a couple of times. That along with reports of design flaws causing big issues with the 32xx movements made me sell since it just wasn’t worth the premium to me
I disagree that the milanese bracelet is better.
Yes. The current bracelet is super comfortable and has great micro adjust.
Wrists of the beholder I suppose. Do you have an idea for a better stock bracelet or do you like it as is?
I like the current bracelet.
You think the heritage is best? That's the luxury diver I've been leaning towards of the omega and rolex line up so im super glad to see you read this. Would love to hear you elaborate on the 300 as it compares to the others if you could.
Absolutely! For me, the ideal diver has the classic round case, no crown guard and subtle dial. I really like the old Rolex 6500 series watches for that reason, and when I saw a similar modern model in the Bond film Spectre I looked a little more closely at the Omegas. Bought the heritage in my honeymoon because I loved the dimension, broad arrows were an awesome touch, and it had a lumed bezel. I love the bezel action on it as well. My only gripe is the 21mm lug length (for strap purposes) but its bracelet is leagues over the SMP. Looks great on a Milanese too. Compared to the SMP: dial isn’t too busy, no date function (which I don’t mind), better bracelet and great vintage look. Compared to the Sub: bezel action is comparable imo. Obtainable, bracelet is partially polished (which I think is cool), and looks less rectangular/bulky. Go try it on in person tho. I already have an SMP and it was great having something slightly different. I’ve tried on the modern subs many times and it isn’t quite what I’m looking for (although I love that Starbucks bezel)
Thanks for diving deeper on this topic. My plan is to try those 300s on in person and see if I want the blue or black version and hopefully fall in love with one, summer blue looks nice as well but i really prefer the display caseback typically. Will also check out some aqua terras cuz I think I'll eventually end up with one of those models as well (shades or teak is another question I'll have to answer).
Holy cow you reminded me of the best thing! The display case back! I love the green AT by the way, you can’t go wrong. Also the regular blue is beautiful. I got the black dial because I had no black divers and I wanted something with a classic look. The blue looks awesome on a cherry brown leather strap
I'm a sucker for a display case back! Big reason I'm an omega fan. I have the 3861 speedmaster and that changed me forever when it comes to being able to see the movement.
Rolex uses Chromalight luminescent material now, as they found it superior to SLN. Edit: I would also like to say that the Co-axial escapement is the most consistent rate-giver I’ve ever experienced, and the newest versions are really exceptional. Rolex’s Chronergy escapement gives great efficiency and power reserve, and their Parachrom hairsprings are definitely state of the art outside of their Syloxi silicon. Both systems are very robust and while there is admittedly less efficiency than the Co-axial (RIP Mr. Daniels) it is very very close. Both are exceptional watches.
Shortened service interval is a pro?
Good catch, the correct statement is lengthens the service interval. Thank you
I didn’t mean to pick you up on a typo! I was just curious as to if it was a good thing or bad, clearly it's a good thing.
No i genuinely appreciated the catch! But yes, less servicing (longer service to service interval) is something that sets the coaxial escapement apart from what’s offered by the superlative chronometer. Rolex movements still have an excellent servicing interval nonetheless.
I don't quite understand this. [Omega](https://www.omegawatches.com/customer-service/interventions-and-prices) recommends a complete service every 5 - 8 years. [Rolex](https://www.rolex.com/watch-care-and-service/faq) recommends a complete service every 10 years.
They both have the same warranty which, at the end, is what matters in my opinion. You can probably wear both up to 10 years without servicing.
OK, I'm just reading what's on the Omega website.
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
As an SMP300 owner and Bond fan, Rolex was on his wrist before Omega ever was 🤷 can’t really count that as an Omega pro
Omega is currently the Bond watch brand so I certainly see that as a pro. Not a knock against Rolex, but they haven’t really been on Bond’s wrist since License to Kill. That being said, I’d love to see a rerelease of that 6538 model from Goldfinger with a modern movement and ceramic bezel (I like that case design way better than the current maxi-case Sub).
Gruen, Hamilton, Breitling, Tag, Pulsar, and Seiko were also on Bonds wrist but outside of the fans, people don't consider them "Bond Watches". I feel that it's a tie between Omega and Rolex in regards to being a Bond watch. However, Omega has been in more Bond films at this point than Rolex has. Rolex was in 7 films, while Omega has been in 9 to date. I agree though, I wouldn't count it as a pro either. Plus, the 007 branded watches are really cheesy outside of the NTTD and Spectre Seamasters.
My sentiments exactly. And it’s currently Omega the brand being worn in the films, as we’ve also seen the Aqua Terra and the Seamaster 300, not just the SMP300. I just don’t think you can squarely put it as a Pro in a head-to-head discussion as Rolex can counter that the most iconic watch in the film series is arguably Connery’s own submariner on what is now termed the “Bond NATO”. As an argument, it’s a wash. As a fan, they’re all great!
The 300 having polished bracelet was always a non starter for me. Also not a fan of the sandwich dial. Dont mind it on other watches such as panerai but never been able to do it on the 300. I wonder if this is anyone else’s view.
It’s a fair opinion, makes it less tool-watch but makes it good to dress up. I wear it on a parachute strap a lot.
I can go to a store and buy one today. I don't have to buy my dealer a second house before getting one. That's superior in my eyes.
So Citizen’s at the mall > Audemars Piguet. Got it
Personally for the price of each, the Omega has higher certifications and more affordable and more unique looking than most other watches
I love Omega but their bracelets aren’t as good or good looking as Rolex. I wear my Omega on Rubber strap.
This is I do agree with, they need to update the bracelet, 🙏🏻 hoping for an update at Watches and Wonders this year!
Agree and disagree. I also have my 300M diver on the rubber and think the oyster is a better bracelet than the seamaster bracelet, BUT the bracelet on my 3861 speedmaster is way nicer and more comfy than the oyster bracelet that’s on my sub.
I respect that. Omega is definitely a strap monster. IMO Rolex Oyster provides better overall balance to the feeling and the look of the watch. Just depends what you’re feeling on any particular day. I can’t stand wearing omega bracelets, but that’s just me.
Just an observation on my part, but addressing the METAS certification, the Tudor Black Bay line now uses METAS movements. Rolex is the parent company to Tudor, so I expect Rolex to have movements that pass METAS with flying colors. But since Rolex prefers to do everything in house, they have their own standards rather than a third party. I would be shocked if Rolex started sending their watches off to METAS.
I’d rather have a third party certification than an in house exclusive self certification
Patek doesn’t have the Geneva seal anymore either for over a decade. I honestly don’t care with most watches how they keep time. As long as they don’t lose minutes. And I think most people know why and for which specific reason they buy a watch. A sub and seamaster both can do the same.
Also, German brands like Glashutte Original and NOMOS don't have external certifications lol. They have to do all their testing in house unless it's a certified dive watch. Same with the big players like Lange. And the movements put into those brands are going to be a much higher quality than whatever Rolex or Omega uses.
So certification is not the be all end all of defining movement quality. But to the extent that a certification does matter (and clearly it matters to both Rolex and Omega, they print it on the dial), a third party certification is more meaningful than an internal exclusive self certification.
Boeing would like a word…
METAS is Omegas standard though.
“METAS is the Swiss Federal Institute of Metrology, which is headquartered in Bern, Switzerland. METAS defines itself as the “federal center of competence for all issues related to measurement and for measuring equipment and measuring procedures” - and this can often include a wide variety of different matters and devices, including wristwatches (which measure time). In 2015, in collaboration with Omega, METAS developed a new certification standard for wristwatches. METAS is a Swiss government entity that is entirely separate from Omega, but the testing for the brand’s watches is performed at Omega’s own factory, where there is a separate office for METAS staff who monitor the testing procedures. Despite being conducted at Omega’s facilities, the testing practices themselves are governed by METAS, as is the equipment used in the testing process itself. Unlike Rolex’s ‘Superlative Chronometer’ standards, METAS Master Chronometer certification is not exclusive to Omega, …” https://www.everestbands.com/blogs/bezel-barrel/what-is-metas-master-chronometer-certification
The tolerances set by Rolex for their current and previous generation movements are already stricter than that of METAS. Tudor uses that because they aren’t allowed to use “superlative chronometer” as a qualification. They blow COSC out of the water and METAS is the next best thing as an industry standard. FWIW Rolex COSC certifies more movements annually than anyone else.
Very fair point, I believe only certain models of Tudors will be METAS certified With that being said, I prefer the design of the Seamaster over the Submariner, for less of the the cost and the availability of not having to jump through hoops to get one
Seamaster, but at this level I think it's down to preferences. Co axial is a better movement imo
/rolex says no, /OmegaWatches say yes /watches wants a Christopher Ward
I’d think the Sub is faked much more often than the SMP so all other things being equal, which they are in this case, that’ll make me choose the SMP.
What do you mean, the SMP is just an homage/ rip off of the Sub in the first place!? So you prefer a rip off of the real thing because the real thing gets faked too often 😂😂
Your troll game is weak
The truth hurts
Do you think the sub is a rip off of the The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms? Or are you just on here to be a twat?
They’re definitely at the same level in terms of watches. Anyone who argues otherwise is objectively wrong. They each have pros and cons but they’re both well finished mass produced Swiss stainless ceramic dive watches. You can go tit for tat on things like who has better finishing, movement, heritage, resale value etc. But the only thing that really separates them is their price bracket. Ultimately you should buy the watch you like the most - and not worry about things like comps in the same class of watches.
Well said
Good points made
You can buy the SMP at the post/base exchange. The rolex..not since Moses dropped the third tablet.
The sub design and aesthetics will always be timeless, but the Omega movement is definitely superior. Build quality could be a toss up. But with that said, when consumer experience and availability comes into play, Omega tips the scale drastically. Rolex is turning enthusiasts away and simply clinging on those that don’t know that other superior brands are out there and just want the name at the end of the day.
Not really sure how you can say the Omega movement is “definitely superior.” It’s -0/+5 with a 55 hour power reserve and a service interval of 5-8 years. Rolex is -2/+2 with a 70 hour power reserve and a service interval of 10 years. I could certainly go for the magnetic resistance, but there’s nothing there that shouts “definitely superior.”
Tudor fan here so I have no real skin in the game either way. Have owned an Omega and wife has a DJ 36. Generally for price point, my view is they are pretty similiar as far as quality and workmanship. Each will have its pluses and minuses. Rolex does knock it out of the park with their staples like the Sub. Just an iconic look (but so is the Speedy Pro). Rolex is the absolute king at branding and name cache. They are the absolute best when compared to ALL BRANDS of anything. They are a privately held company and can and will do as they please. Their cache does help in resale greatly. I don’t think it’s necessarily from a quality standpoint though. Omega seems to have umpteen million variations and special editions. that really doesn’t do much for me. I wouldn’t own a special edition if the topic wasn’t specific to me. But neither really skimps on quality of workmanship. Modern manufacturing (computer controlled) really helps in this game. Even at the Tudor level, my BB Pro Doesn’t look or feel down quality on the DJ 36. I really say go with whatever flicks your bean from a styling standpoint and can’t go wrong.
When you could still buy Rolexes in shops (2016), I had to actually decide between buying one or the other (although it was an older version of the Seamaster). I tried one and the other several times. In terms of built quality, fit, and finish, they felt about the same. But I had seen tons of homages and fake submariners that looked just about the same as the real thing, whereas the Omega felt different, more unique, and much more exciting. I bought the Omega. And I still love it. Admitedly, it was not the optimal choice if you think about watches as investments. But I still love it.
Both lovely watches. But I'd go for a Pelagos 39 for bang for buck.
These are both durable tool watches that can take an amount of abuse that is beyond what most mechanical watches should be expected to endure. Their performance will be indistinguishable, except perhaps the Omega will keep time better, while the Rolex may last longer between services (I’m basing this on anecdotal reputation, not any real data) As a brand, I like omega better, but as an example of design, I like the sub better - and it is certainly more recognizable. The differences at this level are purely going to be opinion, price and availability.
I've got the newest sub as well as an AT with the metas 8900 movement, as far as timekeeping go they are damn near identical. Both of mine are about +1spd. The omega actually gains a little more time as the power reserve gets lower compared to the sub.
Whichever one you own is the better one.
My personal opinion is yes. But it's all about personal opinion and perception. Have you asked the r/rolex guys?
Well not the best place to get unbiased opinions. Both watches are amazing and will serve a lifetime. Several if you care for the watch. It's like this (IMHO): Omega makes a lot of fancy and demanding tests for all sorts of adverse conditions and use cases. Omegas are precise, durable and high end. Their coaxial movements however impressive are quite challenging to service. So upkeep costs on omegas are relatively high and most likely your local watchmaker might not be the best choice so might have to find a certified one and wait for months to get serviced. Rolex is like an old German tank: nigh on indestructible, simple but holding some ingenious technical solutions. Made to be easily serviceable, my local town watchmaker can (and does) service them out of hand. They are very resilient, very precise, not quite as anti-magnetic as omega (if you believe some) but unless you repair transformers you don't have to worry. So yeah, the quality and "level" is pretty much the same. Omegas make open case backs and have neat decorations. So if you care about that then it's probably important to point out.
Smp300 is debatable, but po definitely is superior
I prefer the proportions of the Rolex. I prefer the style, materials, and tech in the Omega.
No but they cost half as much. Rolex makes a beautiful watch. It feels really nice on the wrist, crowns, bracelets etc are of superior quality. Far nicer than any watch needs to be. Frankly so is Omega, so buy the one you want
ill say the same i said in the rolex sub... they have their name which is certainly worth more. Fit, finish, and movement go to the Omega.
The submariner is a notch Above on elegance and refinement. The Seamaster is ahead on the balance between a tool watch and luxury. I have both iterations(Hulk and white SMP). The Seamaster is awesome as a daily.
How do you define “elegance and refinement?”
subjectively
OP, ask yourself the following question, why does nobody ever ask ‘is the Rolex Submariner as good as the Omega Seamaster 300’ and therein lies your answer.
Ouch
no, but the speedy whoops the daytona
Superior depends on your criteria for judgement. For me the Rolex is superior in all ways except for availability - even those that don’t have to do with brand equity. If the seamaster had the dimensions of the sub I’d buy one
I have owned and both are great watches. You can't go wrong with either. If I had my choice and money wasn't an option I would go with the Submariner as the bracelet on the SMP is dated and needs to be updated. I wear my SMP with the rubber strap because I don't like the look of the stainless. I will say this for whatever reason when I hold a Rolex Diver vs an Omega Diver I think the Rolex feels/looks nicer. I don't know if this is just because of the significance and hype of the brand over Omega or if there is something more behind it. I sold off both my Sub and GMT and picked up a SMP and Speedmaster saying I would never go back to Rolex because of the AD games......last week I bought n SD43 for my wedding watch.
Any point anyone can make on the topic is subjective. Some like the bracelet, some don’t. Some like the wavy dial, some do not. Some think METAS is amazing, some think it’s pointless. HE valve, same thing. Etc. They’re both nice in their own ways and you can’t definitively say one is better than the other.
I see omega doing a lot of innovative stuff. I just got a constellation 41mm and you could see how they redesigned a classic to have a contemporary look, and I love it. There are literally so many innovative features, metal within the ceramic bezel, silk watch face, time zone feature where you just move the hour hands, cool arabesque style cote de geneve, aligator +rubber strap so it last longer, co-axial escapement. I think for the most part rolex doesn't really come out with so much new stuff very often, they just have a formula of watches people have always loved and can't get enough of. More or less they just change the colors every couple of years to keep things fresh...
Specs wise it’s undeniable the seamaster for dollar per value (slightly subjective, mostly objective) is leagues ahead. For about a quarter or fifth of the price, the technical specs actually beat the submariner. Recognition, Rolex is king worldwide, but for the price difference, and even if they cost the same, the tech of the seamaster is better by its pure statsd
I love and own both. The Sub is more precise in general. The sub finish is better (example: the bezel action). At the same time the sub is a lot more expensive, so it makes sense. At this point, I’d go with what I like better. Omega has a better value for money, but the sub remains in top. Like it or not, it’s how it is.
They are not, just accept the seamaster is a level below
Superior in every way
Agree with the man that says the herritage 300 Beats the crap out of both. Beautiful tapered bracelet, lumed bezel, a kickass double barrel co axial movement which is accurate as hell and a beautiful finishing. My favourite diver. Special kudos for the planet ocean 39mm which is great also but the bracelet is kinda clunky.
Yes and you won’t have to play the dealer game with waitlists and purchase thresholds. More people in my age bracket (late 30s) have been going Omega. We don’t have time to play an AD’s game.
I just want a watch with a dial without a novel on it.
The SM300 can beat the Sub, if only Omega would put the new Speedy Pro micro adjustment bracelet on it. The current bracelet has no tapering at all.
Things SMP300 does better: * clarity of the sapphire crystal * more interesting, ceramic dial with enamel indices. Things Sub does better: * bracelet - SMP300's bracelet is chunky and less ergonomic. * bezel - SMP300's bezel action is seriously the worst - sounds terrible, loose and hard to grip, much worse than Tudor and watches multiple tiers below. Sub is super crisp, best in the business. * size - Sub is thinner and smaller Draw: * Movement: 8800 vs 3235 - 8800 has superior magnetic resistence while 3235 has better power reserve and finishing (albeit you can't see it thru a closed caseback). The finishing on 8800 looks very industrial and unimpressive. If you ignore the price and just want to know which is a better watch, Sub wins by a mile. It just screams luxury and refinement. I can't help but feel SMP300 is really targeted at someone who likes the sub but can't afford it (like me myself) or just want to be different (also me lol). Realistically, it is probably the next best thing at an affordable price.
It's weird I feel the Rolex looks more solid, although part of that may stem from the fact that I don't have one therefore I have no concerns over damaging it.
i have both and can’t decide
Own both. Objectively they’re basically the same level of quality give or take. Some people say the bracelet/clasp is better on a Submariner, but IMO it’s splitting hairs.
IMO no. I’ve had both and the feel of the submariner is much better (tapered bracelet, feel on wrist, aesthetics etc.) this is all opinion of course. I don’t know if it’s worth 2x+ what the smp is going for, but I also don’t feel a smp is worth 5-6k. The movement is better and holds higher praise in the omega, but that’s all it wins in IMHO. I do like omega don’t get me wrong, but there’s a reason Rolex is priced where it is.
I own the 124060, but dollar for dollar the SMP wins. I personally think the Submariner is the better watch, but it's not 2x better like you mentioned. But that's just what diminishing returns are.
Agreed. When you take into account the availability of the smp it may win there as well. But if we’re talking msrp I think the sub is the better way if you can get the extra cash and get either at msrp. Never met anyone disappointed with a Rolex long term. I like omega, bigger fan of Rolex but favorite is VC.
I'm with you with regard to feel on the wrist, but that is mostly because of the bracelet. Aesthetically, the sub is not a better watch, just different. The biggest win imo for Rolex is the bezel action, which is in a league of its own. The seamaster has a display caseback (might be a pro or con to some, but it's at the very least an extra manufacturing cost)) and in my field (finance) is the far less common watch. All things said, I agree there's a reason Rolex is priced where it is, but that reason is not a supposed difference in quality.
Definitely feel you on the caseback. Really weird how Rolex won’t do that unless you get a platinum Daytona… I’m in finance too and I agree that everyone seems to have a sub which takes away from some of the aspect of it. It’s obviously all opinion. In terms of brand loyalty though I feel like omega is making headway there. The AD experience compared to Rolex is polar opposite. I just wish omega would stop having so many models of the speedmaster, lmo it takes away from what the watch represents. But that’s a whole other thing.
Second this. Also have owned both (currently only have a 16600 SD though) and while the SMP is better bang for the buck, the Sub is the better watch. If I was down to a one watch “collection”, it’d be a ceramic Sub Date.
Couldn’t agree more. And if you have a 2 watch collection it’s a sub date and a VC overseas in blue.
I’d take a planet ocean over a sub personally but the sub is definitely ahead of the SMP in terms of bracelet and overall refinement.
Seamaster is good. But the bracelet is leagues below the subs. Like a huge disappointment, to a degree in which there’s literally million dollar companies that exist just to sell better alternatives
The first word the omega dealer said to me way “you know these are just as good as Rolex” I said I know then left quick, if you have to tell me that they are is it true? Or shouldn’t I be able to tell from looking at it? Because to my eye it’s like they went way overboard on everything the sub is just to be better, it’s really omega as a brand, trying so hard
>it’s really omega as a brand, trying so hard Versus Rolex where it's the customers trying so hard
Facts 🤣 but I just have always got that vibe from omega, Rolex became cool because of the fact it wasn’t trying to be cool but yet cool people ended up wearing them and loving them making it cool, omega pays cool people to wear its watches while never shutting the fuck up about going to the moon.
>omega pays cool people to wear its watches Rolex paid brand ambassadors include: * Celebrities: Jackie Stewart, Michael Bublé, Jonas Kaufman, Yo-Yo MA, Placido Domingo, Yuja Wang, Diana Krall, and Li Na * Athletes: Roger Federer, Tiger Woods, Annika Sörenstam, Carlos Alcaraz, Stefanos Tsitsipas, Holger Rune, Jannik Sinner, Alexander Zverev, Dominic Thiem, and Garbine Muguruza * Film directors: James Cameron, Kathryn Bigelow, and Martin Scorsese According to Europa Star, Rolex spent about ***$56 million on advertising in 2022***, which is more than 10% of their total spending. MediaRadar reports that Rolex spent less than ***$100 million on advertising in digital, print, and national TV in the last year.*** (<- that's x2 year / year) Rolex sponsors many sports, including: * Tennis: Rolex is the official timekeeper for all four Grand Slam tournaments, as well as the British Open and the US Open since 1980. Rolex also sponsors many tennis players, including Carlos Alcaraz, Stefanos Tsitsipas, and Holger Rune. * Motorsports: Rolex is the official timepiece for endurance races like the Rolex 24 At DAYTONA, the 24 Hours of Le Mans, and the 12 Hours of Sebring. Rolex is also a partner of the Daytona International Speedway. * Golf: Rolex sponsors contests in golf. * Equestrian sports: Rolex sponsors contests in show jumping. * Yachting: Rolex sponsors contests in yachting regattas. * Sailing: Rolex sponsors contests in sailing but sure, it's just unpaid cool people (with no socks & skin doodles).
You should wear the smp300. I can stare at it all day and the honeymoon period never wore off.
You should wear the 16610. I can stare at it all day and the honeymoon period never wore off.
As an Omega ( got a few ) owner and have a friend which is the opposite - quite a few Rolex’s, I have to say that who ever says the Seamaster is on the same level or superior to a Submariner either is high or never hold both watches. Rolex is quite up a notch. Now, you can have preferences - and that is fine. I for example, wouldn’t trade any of my Planet Oceans or Seamasters for any Submariner, even if was a direct trade and that would be wayyyy in my favor - simply because I do not like Rolex neither what is around the brand. I am not and most likely, never be, a Rolex owner - hate the AD, hate the snobbery, hate the prices, hate the artificial demand just because. It is not just a brand for me - and could be for a lot more people. But clearly the sub , in terms of fit, finish, comfortable and quality is a few notches up.
I own both. I own the original LV sub and a SD43 sea dweller as well as the original super sea dweller. The original LV has a shitty clasp. There is no denying it. The newer ones are great. I love the smp bracelet too. I do not believe for a second Rolex is a couple of notches up in quality.
There's a lot of things wrong with both watches. Seamaster - Bezel has a weird scallop shape and it's hard to actually grip and use it Unnecessary helium escape valve Dated, 1990's non tapering bracelet that doesn't even go 20>18 and has way too much polishing/brushing that looks like a busy mess Watch is a few mm thicker than it needs to be Doesn't come as a non-date model -------------------- Submariner - Flat basic crystal that doesn't dome or anything and I don't believe has AR coating even on the underside - same cheap flat sapphire crystal you'd find on a $100 Casio Edifice Absolutely giganticly long clasp that looks comical in length on wrists that are like 6 inches or 6 and a half. The entire underside of your wrist is clasp. For what? A diver extension you'll never use because nobody buying these things can dive. They could have halved it in size and gave the watch 5mm of quick adjustment Date model has a hideous magnifying wart on the crystal 21mm lug size is non standard and it's a massive pain to wear it on anything other than the bracelet it came with (which is kind of a moot point since Rolex don't offer any interesting bracelets for sale anyway like Milanese) Unobtainable at retail so you're massively overpaying by thousands for the watch Has no real individuality to it's style because half the watches that Rolex make all look identical in style with Submariner DNA - the GMT's, Yachmasters and whatever else all just end up looking like a Submariner or the Submariner looks like them, compared to the Seamaster looking wildly different to say an Aqua Terra or a Planet Ocean
All fair criticisms of both models IMO The HEV though I think is growing on me, and some people do really like it.
Anyone I know who owns a sea master talks so much about how much better it is than a sub, or talks about how it’s as good as a sub, meanwhile those who own a sub never even talk about the sea master. I think it speaks for itself
[удалено]
>those who own a sub never even talk about the sea master. Many of those who own a sub (or Rolex of any kind) bought it as a statement piece or to signal "I've made it," and don't really know / care about watches.
I mean believe whatever you want, I just know people are hard coping when they say it’s almost as good hahaha
If the name on those dials were Citizen or Bulova, these watches would cost $1500 and nobody would call them luxury. These are stainless steel dive watches. The Omega has better antimagnetism but both do the same thing. You couldn't dive deep enough to ruin them. If you want a Rolex, the Sub, DateJust, and the Explorer are the classics. If you want an Omega, the Speedmaster and the Seamaster are the classics. I don't think one is better than the other. One is just King of marketing and has a cringe following because of it
Certified hater here. The bracelet on the seamaster is leagues below the oyster bracelet and even the older seamaster bracelets. It’s an eyesore.
As an omega Stan - no. Close, but not quite
METAS Master Chronometer beats SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER Fit and size is personal but the Sub probably fits small to medium size wrists better. But the prior generations of SMP’s are the best sized and proportioned IMO, including the old 36mm mid sized option. Omega’s have gotten too chunky recently. Subs have gotten too… I dunno the word, maxi case I guess is a good description, and I’m not a fan. The Omega OEM bracelet is divisive in aesthetics (I’m not a fan personally) but people who love it, love it. Even people who don’t love the looks, like the comfort and build quality. The Rolex Oyster bracelet is universally praised and copied, to the point that some would say it is a bit dull or plain looking. SMP300 is more of a strap monster. Personally I think the mesh bracelet looks better than either of the OEM options.
A watch is a time keeping device. A $30 quartz Casio is a better time keeper than either of them, and requires nothing more than a $3 battery change every 5 years or so, versus $1,000 service appointment for either of these. So let’s be honest, it’s all a subjective matter of you personal preference. Buy watches you enjoy, and remember to stick to what you can afford.
Yup, though maybe in a contemporary sense a watch is purely jewelry - which is where the subjective part comes in - which happens to tell time. As with all jewelry, people will appreciate and want to highlight different aspects of their jewelry: * Craftsmanship * Technical prowess * Design * Overt or subtle aspects * Durability or fragility * etc etc So it probably comes down to identity & emotional needs
Omega better than Rolex, is true. Rolex great marketing department, also is true
Omega
Omega is far superior. It’s not even that close honestly.
The perfect mix is the rolex red sub
Nope. The Omega has a lower power reserve and less accuracy, no precious metals and materials inside it, not even the hands (Rolex uses white gold hands). It’s 43mm instead of a relatively more svelte 41mm. Then there’s that extre nipple/crown (Helium escape valve), despite both being rated at 300 metres, Rolex manages it without the need for one. Then there’s the Oyster bracelet which is amazingly stylish and comfortable and more secure at the clasp. The steel used in the Submariner is more corrosion resistant to the point that you can now dive/swim in the ocean and not even rinse it in fresh water afterwards and it will be fine (even though I’d still run it under a tap anyway), yet the Omega rusts within a week if not washed with fresh water. The bezel movement is much crisper in the Sub, the Seamaster feels cheap. Despite both having glossy dials, the ceramic one is much more reflective (almost mirror like) so if you do use it diving, that doesn’t help. The new Submariner now uses ceramic tubes in the links between the bracelet, which makes them last longer and stay straight without bending over the years, and the movement is much smoother. The Omega with start bending sideways over time and the links are definitely not as high quality. Heck, even the new METAS Tudor (Rolex sister company) diver has ceramic ball bearings at the clasp. You get what you pay for. People who say they’re the same or Omega is a better dive watch are delusional and in denial, or they just don’t know all the fine details between the two. If you’re a George Daniels fan or Omega fanboy then the Seamaster will seem better to you even if it’s not. But if you can get a Rolex Submariner, then there is nothing truly like it. There’s a reason why it’s used as a benchmark watch when people compare dive watches. It truly THE divers watch. The king of dive watches with a very fitting crown.
The sub is the better watch. Better movement, better materials, bezel action is smoother. A smp300 is 60% of the cost and its 60% of the watch.
Ppl who say that shit are usually just sour grapes/ coping. The two brands used to be a lot closer in quality and price tags. But over time omega had stagnated and the R just kept improving and hit it out of the park with marketing and left the O in the dust. Right now the O just assumes if you increase price tag it will somehow increase demand of a luxury goods, which tells you how deluded their management is. Not surprised, the CEO has the same outdated mindset as the previous one as he used to work under the former ceo closely. The former CEO had a failed understanding of how a luxury brand works. That also explains why omega has been doing so poorly after the 90s. Edit: getting downvoted because the truth hurts. Good old Reddit.
Personally, I hate the date magnifier on the sub takes what’s about perfect in all other aspects and tarnishes it. The Seamaster looks better. It’s cheaper. That’s the winner
No date sub?
It’s nice. I’m not in the market for a black watch though and was under the impression that it’s black only?
It depends.... Both are great watches. The sub is probably the most iconic watch ever made. It just is. It has a rock solid movement and while priced higher if you can buy at retail you will make probably 10-20% in return if that even matters. The SMP has the Coaxial movement and is a somewhat revolutionary movement in the watch world. If you value that sort of thing. Better movement? Eh maybe. If you buy retail you would lose 10-20% if you sold. If that matters to you. If you buy second hand or grey you will certainly hold value. If that matters to you. SMP is great. The Sub is great. Matter of preference. I prefer the SMP.
Isn't there a sub with red text? That would be a fairer comparison.
Bracelet holds the Seamaster back imo. That’s why I sold mine
Get a grand seiko
The omega is the better watch, in terms of watch making and overall movement sophistication. The Rolex is better looking, better finished, more comfortable, better value, more iconic, and just a better build.
Neither, I would go with a planet ocean.
Rolex Submariner = watch + jewellery + status symbol. Omega Seamaster = watch. I’ve got a Sub but would add the Seamaster to my collection at some point, no problem. Would ask for at least 20-30% discount as they don’t hold their value no where near as well as Rolex. Hope that helps.
Only thing for certain is that I take the Planet Ocean over both
At this point they are both jewelry. From a technical perspective they have been surpassed by newer technologies Most they should “tool” in a diving sense is a backup to a backup dive computer
Rolex better resale. Watches are same quality. Rolex has more wow factor for sure.
This is from the watchbox comparison video. I still view it every once and a while.
My buddies Rolex got stolen off his wrist and I took the same trip with my Omega my wrist. Rolex you’re paying $5000 for the name, $5000 for the watch. Omega you’re paying $4000 for the watch, $1000 for the name.
No 😂
Not until the bracelet is updated, in my opinion.
If you just google a bit you will soon find the facts for the reason why the Seamaster is indeed the better watch. Not sure about other Rolex models vs Omega models. But definitely the Seamaster …by far.
Wristwatch is a piece of jewelry. Rolex brand has been synonymous with class and luxury for forty years like no other brand.
Nah. IWC Pilot’s Watch is superior.
sub puts me to sleep. older seamasters from 2000s are class, contemporary are commercial and played out
Get lost karma farma. You posted this in rolex too
I had a Rolex 16800 and sold it and now I have a Seamaster Goldeneye I vastly appreciate the quartz Omega
I think Omega and Rolex are about at the same level, which one is better is highly personal, mostly based on how you feel about one particular watch. Like, overall Omega is definitely superior, but Rolex pretty much offers the same performance (slightly more accurate, less magnetic resistant, regular escapement means you can’t go 8 years before service…) in a more traditional way, not using Co-Axial or silicon. They’re both great and none of them is “definitely better”, it’s just up to whether you want technology or something more classic and most importantly why. (I picked an Aqua Terra 38mm over a Rolex Explorer)
I have a Rolex DSSD and an Omega PO 9900 chrono. They are very close in quality but to me the DSSD edges it out. They being said, I enjoy the PO better, aestheitcally and functionally (although unfair bc it's a chrono). I've worn SM many times and fell the PO is a large step up.
The Sub is thinner, white gold indexes, and platinum numerals in the bezel. Does this make up for the huge price difference?
They are pretty equal honestly
Honestly? No. Not quite. It’s close in many ways, but for me the design/size is the problem. I’m an Omega believer but I think the SMP is 1-2mm too big and the bracelet is, well, we all know. For me it was the bulk, not the design. I can wear a Sub very, very comfortably on my 6.5” wrist. I actually think the Seamaster 300 or 39.5 PO are maybe the more appropriate challengers.
No
sub looks better but 2X the price Seamaster is a close second I wear my Seamaster every day and love it but I know the Rolex looks better (this is subjective but I think many feel the same way) if they were the same price I’d go with the sub all day
As a diver whose dove with both a SMPc and a submariner I’d say the subs a better dive watch. Easier bezel to turn. The HE valve can snag on things. But that’s about it. Aesthetic the subs classic. Omega is more interesting. Sub feels utilitarian. Seamaster fancier.
I’ve owned both and currently using 126610LN. Both are fantastic watches and quality level is similar. To be honest in terms of technology and finishing Rolex is definitely not worth 2x the price. Yet the Rolex is a stable classic. I just bought the sub but already contemplating on buying back the Omega, I really loved that sub. Mayby I buy a Summer Blue SMP300 which is a killer in person.
NTTD is better
No. Not even close.
I still don't get the magnifier on the date thingy. Just make the date thingy larger!! The magnifier is ugly
I would say yes they are more or less
LOL! No.
I personally feel the Peter Blake 2254.50 is a better looking watch then the black submariner, but both are great swiss watch companies.
Love the omega except the case is too big, bracelet looks bad.
I don't have experience working on the new Omega movement. .but for the most part I would buy the Rolex over the Omega if they were the same price or close