- Posts
- 94
- Likes
- 144
OrangeSport
·I posted this over at Watchuseek a little while ago, and thought it might be of interest here too. Nothing too serious, just a light-hearted comparison of two iconic pieces. Enjoy:
Thought it might be fun to compare two of my watches which at first glance are very different, but in some ways are very similar. Say hello to the Rolex Submariner 14060M and the Omega Speedmaster Professional 3570.50.00. Yeah, I know, they're nothing like each other are they? An automatic diver and a manual wind chronograph. But, there are also some big similarities. Both are stainless steel luxury sports watches, both are on a bracelet, neither has a date, both have clear and easy to read faces, both are very balanced in appearance and both can be traced back to original models from the fifties. More importantly, in real and honest modern day usage, these are just nice, sporty everyday watches with a degree of versatility to them. So, perhaps not that different after all?
Quality and Finish
These are both very well finished watches, with a mixture of polished and brushed services. There some key differences here. The Rolex has a highly scratch resistant sapphire crystal, and the Omega uses hesalite. We don't want those astronauts breathing in broken glass, do we? The Submariner has white gold hands and applied markers, the Speedmaster makes do without such luxuries.
The Omega has a better bracelet and clasp. Especially the clasp. There's nothing wrong with the Rolex's, and the design has been shown to be reliable, but the Omega's just feels more substantial. The whole watch also feels a little heavier.
I prefer the feel of the Omega's mechanism when winding the watches, and the hands have less bounce in them when adjusting the time.
Looks and Style
I like pretty plain, clear and well balanced faces on my watches, and both of these oblige. They both look classy and classic. Neither watch is remotely dressy, but both are versatile. The Speedmaster is probably a little more casual, but there is really very little in it. It also has a nicely finished case back.
Functionality and Performance
Plus points for both watches here.
Submariner: Waterproof to 300 meters, unidirectional rotating bezel, automatic movement, hacking seconds hands, screw down crown and COSC certification.
Speedmaster: Chronograph, tachymeter and a 52 hour power reserve (Omega quotes 40).
OK, so a few more points to the Rolex!
Costs
There is a big price difference between these two. The 14060M is now discontinued, but retailed at £4100 in its last days. The Speedmaster is now £2880. However, in my experience, larger discounts are available on the Omega (approaching 20%, against 5% on the Rolex - both based on what I paid) which increases the price difference.
The Omega is cheaper to service too.
Conclusion
A tough, tough call. I really like both watches (no surprises there, as I went out and bought them). Both have prestigious names, impeccable pedigrees, fascinating histories (especially the Speedmaster) and classic good looks. They are well built, reliable timepieces. I am a sucker for the Rolex brand, but the Omega is better value in my opinion. But when has this ever been about value?
The Rolex probably just edges it for me because of the automatic movement, better water resistance and (in the case of my two examples) better accuracy. Neither are far out though, and I am sure they could be adjusted to be more accurate. The Submariner averages + 2 or 3 seconds per day, the Speedmaster runs at about + 6. Generally the Rolex is my regular watch on Monday to Friday, then on Saturday morning I pop on the slightly more relaxed Speedmaster for the weekend. Obviously my watch choice varies as specific events dictate, but that's my standard approach and it means I get to enjoy them both regularly.
As I often do, I asked my six year old daughter which she preferred. As kids often do, she cut through all the BS and answered very confidently that the Rolex is better. Why? "Because not that many people go to the moon these days, but lots of people dive!" Genius!
Thanks for reading. Hopefully it was interesting.
Thought it might be fun to compare two of my watches which at first glance are very different, but in some ways are very similar. Say hello to the Rolex Submariner 14060M and the Omega Speedmaster Professional 3570.50.00. Yeah, I know, they're nothing like each other are they? An automatic diver and a manual wind chronograph. But, there are also some big similarities. Both are stainless steel luxury sports watches, both are on a bracelet, neither has a date, both have clear and easy to read faces, both are very balanced in appearance and both can be traced back to original models from the fifties. More importantly, in real and honest modern day usage, these are just nice, sporty everyday watches with a degree of versatility to them. So, perhaps not that different after all?
Quality and Finish
These are both very well finished watches, with a mixture of polished and brushed services. There some key differences here. The Rolex has a highly scratch resistant sapphire crystal, and the Omega uses hesalite. We don't want those astronauts breathing in broken glass, do we? The Submariner has white gold hands and applied markers, the Speedmaster makes do without such luxuries.
The Omega has a better bracelet and clasp. Especially the clasp. There's nothing wrong with the Rolex's, and the design has been shown to be reliable, but the Omega's just feels more substantial. The whole watch also feels a little heavier.
I prefer the feel of the Omega's mechanism when winding the watches, and the hands have less bounce in them when adjusting the time.
Looks and Style
I like pretty plain, clear and well balanced faces on my watches, and both of these oblige. They both look classy and classic. Neither watch is remotely dressy, but both are versatile. The Speedmaster is probably a little more casual, but there is really very little in it. It also has a nicely finished case back.
Functionality and Performance
Plus points for both watches here.
Submariner: Waterproof to 300 meters, unidirectional rotating bezel, automatic movement, hacking seconds hands, screw down crown and COSC certification.
Speedmaster: Chronograph, tachymeter and a 52 hour power reserve (Omega quotes 40).
OK, so a few more points to the Rolex!
Costs
There is a big price difference between these two. The 14060M is now discontinued, but retailed at £4100 in its last days. The Speedmaster is now £2880. However, in my experience, larger discounts are available on the Omega (approaching 20%, against 5% on the Rolex - both based on what I paid) which increases the price difference.
The Omega is cheaper to service too.
Conclusion
A tough, tough call. I really like both watches (no surprises there, as I went out and bought them). Both have prestigious names, impeccable pedigrees, fascinating histories (especially the Speedmaster) and classic good looks. They are well built, reliable timepieces. I am a sucker for the Rolex brand, but the Omega is better value in my opinion. But when has this ever been about value?
The Rolex probably just edges it for me because of the automatic movement, better water resistance and (in the case of my two examples) better accuracy. Neither are far out though, and I am sure they could be adjusted to be more accurate. The Submariner averages + 2 or 3 seconds per day, the Speedmaster runs at about + 6. Generally the Rolex is my regular watch on Monday to Friday, then on Saturday morning I pop on the slightly more relaxed Speedmaster for the weekend. Obviously my watch choice varies as specific events dictate, but that's my standard approach and it means I get to enjoy them both regularly.
As I often do, I asked my six year old daughter which she preferred. As kids often do, she cut through all the BS and answered very confidently that the Rolex is better. Why? "Because not that many people go to the moon these days, but lots of people dive!" Genius!
Thanks for reading. Hopefully it was interesting.
