ive just got the same watch but quartz, second hand . i was getting blue dial but mix up in transit i got black. looking at it now ime not disappointed at all !.it is one good looking watch that ime proud to own.
I'm sad at how much these are skyrocketing in prices :(. I remember seeing used one for sale in great condition for ~$1,400 less than a year ago and that was a bit overpriced at the time.
I like the review very much! I'm a happy owner of the omega smp, simply my favorite watch! The watch is amazing when lights are out, perhaps you can add a few seconds by night next time..
@ISREAL53 You stated in your post, “I guess people who buy Rolex want more from a watch.” In the realm of luxury timepieces, Rolex simply subsists in the lower plane of the range. That particular brand is purchased by those of that stripe who are failingly and comically attempting to satisfy pathetic feeling of wanting to be seen as someone with class. Class tells you know and in your specific instance, it tells categorically nothing.
@ISREAL53 Those of us with means and actual discrimination gravitate towards true luxury when it comes to timepieces. We would never even consider procuring a Rolex. I myself own a Vacheron and Constantin. Further, given the choice between an Omega and a Rolex unequivocally the selection is Omega, well-chosen indeed. Of all the luxury watch brands with which I am familiar only Rolex possesses the reputation of screeching loudly and puerilely, “Here I am. Look at me. Look at me”.
@ISREAL53 All others retain and enjoy the appeal of understated magnificence and refinement. Perhaps in the future you should heed the advice of your betters and consider removing from your wrist that abomination you assume to be a fine timepiece.
@dhfun1 whoa. 'your BETTERS'? did you really just say that? are you suggesting your subjective opinion on class makes you this guy's 'better'? even if it's a belief of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, it's subjective. oh wow. yeah, that's class. i find there's a lot of stupidity in the working classes, but there's a shit-load of unfair chauvanism in the upper classes. christ. someone is ignorant of some facts, then tell them they're wrong. but there's no need to be a total prick. *Erieboy62*
@null140 Anyway this has become tiresome. To “quote” you, you are ignorant of the use of the facts of the English language and you are wrong. Don’t bother to respond unless you can write properly and if you do consider responding you may want to reflect on the ancient Chinese saying that applies so fittingly to you in this situation, “Better to be thought of as a fool than to open one’s mouth (or in your case compose written material) and remove all doubt”.
@null140 There is no such thing as daft “Blue Blood” here in the United States. We are too clever for that façade of dimwittedness that is used in the U.K. to hoodwink and bamboozle the masses. Over here we know that anyone and everyone in any part of the world bleeds red.
@null140 Mind you, I am speaking in economic terms here not sociologic terms. While we're on the subject, what’s with you Limeys and your sensitivity to “classes”. Null140 do you feel so downtrodden, put upon, and bad about yourself that you have to be so touchy in your grey little life to the class structure that is so inflexibly unshakable in “Jolly Old England? You see, that is why we kicked your ass out of the United States in the eighteenth century.
@null140 I have not found a large amount of silly or unwise people in the working classes, just people with a lack of knowledge. A good example is your glaring ignorance of the proper use of the English language when you write which is a truly sad state of affairs indeed. As for the upper classes, there I must agree with you. However as a denizen of the true middle class I encounter for more people of the lower class than the upper class.
@null140 Now as to your rejoinder, no I did not say I was this persons better, I wrote it. Yes my opinion on class subjective or not does indeed make me “this guy’s” better. You wrote that you find there is a lot of stupidity in the working classes. I disagree. According to Cambridge dictionaries online the definition of stupidity is “the state of being silly or unwise”.
@null140 Seventh you wrote, oh wait this torture of being compelled to read your repulsive, putrid writing has finally ended! God be praised. Now, I reviewed everything I wrote and as best as I can ascertain, I made no errors in my composition. However, my review of my work was exceedingly difficult after being forced to wallow in the hog swill you call writing. Also, I was not very candid when I said I made no mistakes. I left two mistakes for you to find but I know you won’t, how sad.
@null140 Sixth you wrote, “christ. someone is ignorant of some facts, then tell them they're wrong. but there's no need to be a total prick.”
It should read, “Christ, if someone is ignorant of some facts, then tell them they're wrong but there's no need to be a total prick.”
4 errors, failure to capitalize the starting word of the sentence, “christ”, use of a period instead of a comma after “christ” failure to use the work “if” before the word “someone” and use of a period after the “wrong".
@null140 Fifth you wrote, “i find there's a lot of stupidity in the working classes, but there's a shit-load of unfair chauvanism in the upper classes.”
It should read, “I find there's a lot of stupidity in the working classes, but there's a shit-load of unfair chauvinism in the upper classes.”
2 errors, failure to capitalize the beginning word and “chauvinism” was misspelled.
@null140 Second, you wrote, “are you suggesting your subjective opinion on class makes you this guy's 'better'?”
It should read, “Are you suggesting your subjective opinion on class makes you this person’s “better”?”
3 errors, you did not capitalize “are” because it starts the query, you should have used “person’s” not “guy’s” and once again you failed to use double quotation marks with the word “better”.
@null140 First, you wrote, “'your BETTERS'? did you really just say that?”
It should read, “Your BETTERS”, did you really just say that?
5 errors, you should have used double quotation marks with “your BETTERS”, capitalized the “y” in “yours”, not included the question mark after “BETTERS”, used a comma after BETTERS” and one should NEVER end a sentence with a preposition as you did, “that”.
@null140 I ask you, how do you expect me to accept such a poorly crafted reaction? Surely, you are jesting with this abomination of scripting, if that is what one can even call it. Now because I feel such pity for you since you are so clearly lacking in instruction of spelling and grammar, I will generously dole out some cerebral charity to you and point out the mistakes I found in hopes that in the future you may write properly.
@dhfun1 If you bothered to climb out of your ass, you might realize that you did not address my valid accusations of your personal character, and instead hid, like a turtle in his shell, behind a wall of cold, purely linguistic exposition. basically, you ignored me because if you didn't, it would hurt your feelings, and tried to palm me off by analysing and breaking down every single perfunctory detail of my technical linguistic error, without giving ANY time to the meaning behind my words.
@null140 Hmm where am I to start? Yes of course, your atrocious and barbarous misuse of the King’s English. Your reply to me obviously created without any thought towards or wisdom of the English language is a fine example of personal impulsivity and simple-mindedness. Are you aware you wrote eighteen (18) spelling and grammatical errors in your response?
@dhfun1 Are you serious? I can't believe you actually have the time to do this sort of thing. And by the way, a guy who got eight A* grades in GCSE, including English Language and Literature, and a guy who was the only one to achieve an A in AS level English Language at my sixth form, is not as simple-minded as you think. You need to seek psychiatric help. That you made so many responses to my comment is, frankly, not normal at all.
@dhfun1 Oh, by the way, I don't give a crap about how you think I should write a youtube comment; this is a relaxed social atmosphere, and one that I feel does not require a total level of formality. On what you will probably pick up on as a horrifically non sequitur, irrelevent personal note, if you have a significant other in your life, then I feel truly sorry for them.
@dhfun1 You talked about class observations, and blue blood, but failed to give any conclusion, because you couldn't be bothered! You pretty much gave me a deceptively sophisticated "shut up." I recall many an ignorant fool telling me that, without any reason other than them not being able to end their 'argument' decisively.
@dhfun1 Of course, to clarify in a succinct way, the true 'meaning behind my words', far from being about class observations, was in fact, "You, dhfun1, are an arrogant prick!" You avoided this point, by writing that you did not "say" you were "that guy's better", but that you "wrote" it. That was the end of it. You rebuked my later arguments, but gave no explanation for your belief that you are a better person than ISRAEL53; not to mention the fact that believing such, is purely egotistical.
@dhfun1 I could say that you misspelled "word" as "work", you failed to close your double quotation of "Jolly Old England" and your written style is quite bad! I would point to your second barrage on my own writing for examples; "You did not capitalize "are", which you should have since it starts the query... and once again you failed to place double quotation marks around the word "better". This would read a lot better than your attempt at silencing me. I'm seventeen years old, by the way.
@ISREAL53 Lastly, after perusing the scores of comments on this article I seem to have found the one who appears to be your arch nemesis: Erieboy62 he stated, “Also, before you expound with your expertise on Omega and Rolex watches you should heed the ancient Chinese proverb which does applies to you in this situation: Better to be thought of as a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt.” Out of necessity I must concur unquestionably with what he said about you.
im finally getting an omega seamaster next week after years of wanting one :) unfortunately its not the co axial version as i cant quite afford that one,its exactley the same as the one in this vid but with battery power.i could have walked away with the blue face version,but i really want black(hence next week),im so excited :)
They don't make this anymore and is pretty much sold out everywhere. Pretty much the only way to find one is on the used market and they get swooped up fast.
I actually like the tubing bar system over the screws in the links.
The Seamaster, I believe has even 2 tubes in there over the standard 1 tube. The screws tend to unscrew themselves over a period of time even in Rolex's and Ebel's as well as other luxury brands that use the system (just physics - does not mean it's bad).
I personally think the tubing bar system is the most efficient/effective way of keeping the links in place over a long period of time as long as you know what you're doing
Couple pts; (1) the red dot seal between the screw-down case-back & the case, used by Omega to confirm the movement has not been tampered w/ since leaving the factory, has been around since at least the late 90s. Now Omega uses a blue dot (from approx 2006 on). Also if u send an Omega watch into an authorized service center for an overhaul it will come back w/ a blue dot seal.
And (2) unless u r a deep sea saturation diver the helium escape valve is utterly useless.
@atrumira Interesting to hear 2006 associated with the Blue Dot. I've heard people talk about Blue Dot, but I have two Omegas from Mid-2008, and both have Red Dots.
@breitlingsource You both are correct! Omegas still come with the red dot when bought new but when serviced at an Omega service center it will come back with the blue dot. Although if you give your watch a polish or really wear it, it tends to rub off.
My seamaster has been very unreliable-Omega repaired it earlier in year (took them 3 MONTHS)!! One month later it failed again and they have had it for another 2 months so far..VERY POOR service from Omega. When I finally get it back I'll sell it and buy another watch, but DEFINITELY NOT ANOTHER OMEGA !!!
@idkhedidit - What must have been a fraud?? Bought watch from official Omega dealer, Omega UK repaired it( albeit not very well ), The Omega retailer told me they have many problems with very slow repair times with Omega and very poor customer service. Problem is Omega were swallowed up by Swatch who sell cheap crappy watches and dont care about customer service...
I checked out their 1846 chronometer a while back, a real beaut with a superb movement - leagues better than anything Omega has to offer (& I'm an Omega junkie).
wore this for sometime, very comfortable daily watch. well, until a lot of fake ones showed up......otherwise a nice watch, easy to read day and nite and handling vibrations pretty well.( Mountain Biking, LOL)
About half the cost is for the case and the name Omega. The other half is for the the design/engineering/manufacture of the internal mechanical movement. It's a certified chronometer, which means each watch is tested to be accurate within a few seconds each day; remarkable for a something running on nothing but mechanical gearing and a spring. And, it's manufactured in Switzerland, which has high labor costs. Omega is actually one of the more affordable premium Swiss brands!
I'm no watch expert, that's just some pretty general info. I bought an Omega Seamaster last July and I'm pretty happy with it.
If you want to see what goes into a watch like this, you can go to Omega's website (omegawatches com) and click on the link at the bottom for "co-axial technology", there's a video showing similar watches being made. The video gives an idea why they cost a lot.
@damthatriver09 Not really. This is an entry level priced watch. You want to see expensive check out Patek Phillippe or Zenith. Pricewise an Omega seamsater or speedmaster is a beater, that is a wear everywhere, all the time and in all conditions watch, and is built to be. Rolex and Breitling are in this category as well. All three companies have more expensive offerings too.
@starfaery Mechanical watches dont have batteries. As or thunderstorms; your watch wont care no matter what movement it has. You will be dead long before the watch stops ticking in such situations. Strong magnetic fields might affect your watch but that doesnt really apply here.
@starfaery No, it doesnt. Opposite charges, however, do. No matter what watch you are wearing you will have the same probability to be hit by lightning. And you wont care about your watch if you get struck by lightning.
Its pure luck if you manage to survive getting hit, better to not get hit in the first place.
@qwasdninja It does, that's why you shouldn't runn electricity during thunderstorms. There's a bigger chance of attracting electrical charges this way. If the watch attracted a strike, you will care about your watch.
And no it's not just pure luck. There are things you can do to avoid getting hit, and survive if you do, like kneeling, as tall things attracts lightening, opening your mouth as if it strikes to release exes pressure, thus minimizing impact, avoid standing under trees.
@qwasdninja It does, that's why you shouldn't runn electricity during thunderstorms. There's a bigger chance of attracting electrical charges this way. If the watch attracted a strike, you will care about your watch.
And no it's not just pure luck. There are things you can do to avoid getting hit, and survive if you do, like kneeling, as tall things attracts lightening, opening your mouth if it strikes to release exes pressure, thus minimizing impact, avoid standing under trees.
@qwasdninja Not getting hit in the first place is my point.
However surviving, is not pure luck, there are rational factors playing in. like how charged the lightening, was what was the particular situation. How did the person go about things.
@starfaery To say that it is pure luck is a very, very good approximation. One could, of course, argue that nothing is truly random though. If you get hit by lightning you are going to die, period. A breathtakingly small percent survive though, just like all people who shoot parts of their heads off dont die. It doesnt matter if you have a raincoat, do yoga och have your phone out. If lightning strikes nearby increases the chances of survival vs getting hit straight on.
The best, most rugged, best looking dive / outdoor watch going, ever. None finer whether Quartz, but especially the Automatic Chronometer. Classicly marked in Super Luminova, no numbers and a black wave face. This watch sets the mark in looks, performance, and value.
I love my omega, I have the exact same one, I also have a ss submariner with date 1993 16610, next on my list is the planet ocean casino royale edition!
@NielsUHP10 Automatic.. 36 or 37mm Model. Bought from a dealer in Singapore. Just after the warranty ran out it stopped working. Got serviced in NY, they took about 3 months and $450
I bought my first omega bond version co-axial 2220.80, after wearing citizen eco-drive for half decade or so (Awesome technology/ Accuracy, and affordable, i.e. blue angel & Caliber 8700 series...). I honestly must say that it took some courage to put all this money in the Omega,
but I'm glad I did, the watch has a nice look, the weight is about right, I like the sapphire crystal, something the citizen lacks, at the exception for limited editions. Co-axial vs Eco-drive,Japanese vs Swiss,all good
I generally prefer tag heuer over omega. I prefer there sportier direction as oposed to the gentlemans watch. However in saying that my favourite watch is the omega seamaster with the blue bezel. ie the bond watch. Damn its a nice watch. I wear a tag f1. Great value for money watch without spending big dollars.
Well quartz is both more reliable and accurate than any mechanical work. The difference is of course prestige. You don't buy luxury watches to tell time better. A 10$ watch is likely to work just as well as a $2000 one. You buy the because of the prestige and the luxury of having them. Or just because you enjoy watches as I do.
i have a similar omega (but the blue dial and its quartz - much better accuracy) - I'm also a diver... have to be honest, spending $200 on a decent dive computer by suunto or oceanic is far safer/better value than spending $2000 on an omega or rolex! these watches are great for when you need to dress smart for a wedding, and coll down the pub, but REAL divers tend not to bother wearing watches when a decent dive computer does it all for you.
I'm thinking to buy an Omega watch but I cannot choose. The choices is between the Omega Seamster 300M 212.30.41.61.01.001, the Omega Limited Edition James Bond 212.30.41.20.01.002 or the Omega Seamaster James Bond Mens 300m Chronograph 213.30.42.40.01.001.
I really dislike the whole automatic thing instead of the battery, but that's my opinion. Can some one give me some info about what watch, some opinions?
I'd guess about 2500 dollars. It all depends on which movement you want. The quartz are the "cheapest". Here in Norway the Omega Seamaster quartz is 14.300 nok, which is 2500 dollars.
To review: you made seven points, point two was true, points one and five are non-sequitor, with points three, four, six and seven you display your ignorance.
Lastly ISREAL53 if you reply to me, no personal attacks on me, stick to the subject at hand. Also, before you expound with your expertise on Omega and Rolex watches you should heed the ancient Chinese proverb which does applies to you in this situation: Better to be thought of as a fool than to opens ones mouth and remove all doubt.
If the Speedmaster has no gasket in the crown, how then can it be water resistant to the depth of one-hundred meters? Also all one need do is explore the official Omega website to see that most, if not all, Omega watches are water resistant to some degree which would tell anyone with common sense that Omega crowns do indeed have gaskets..
Your final point: no gaskets in the crown with this final fact you again display your ignorance. As I previously stated my Speedmaster does indeed have a gasket in the crown and as jezztech stated about his Seamaster: it has a crown gasket !!!. My Speedmaster is water resistant to one-hundred meters yet you state Omega watches have no gaskets in the crown, which begs the question;
Further, Rolex watch case backs and bracelets are all made of 316 L S. steel. Combining these facts one can see that Omega bezels are hardly tinny. When you stated Omega bezels were tinny, perhaps you were mistaken and meant to refer to Rolex case backs and bracelets?
Rolex uses 904L stainless steel. 316L S. steel has 10-14% nickel content whereas 904L has 23-28% nickel, so it's hardly surprising that it's more corrosion resistant. But not very good for people with a nickel allergy. No watch manufacturers except Rolex consider it worth using the 904L steel, especially given that the price for 904L is approximately three times that of 316L.
Your fifth point: small date, since you did not specify I can only assume that it is the Cyclops Lens found on Rolexes to which you are referring. I put this down to personal preference of the owner. Your sixth point: not the best quality steel, tinny bezel, with this fact you again display your ignorance. As I previously stated, Omega uses AISI 316L Austenitic stainless steel with excellent corrosion resistance. Rolex uses 904L stainless steel.
which you yourself have acknowledged as being higher-end than Rolex and Omega, use not only in-house movements but ETA movements as well. So the fact that your Rolex has an in-house movement is hardly anything about which to crow.
Your fourth point: no in house movement, with this fact you again display your ignorance. My Speedmaster is indeed based upon the ETA 7750 movement. However though Omega does use ETA movements (that are modified in-house by Omega such as the ETA 7750), Omega does indeed produce some movements in-house. It is also a widely known fact that many of the finer watchmakers,
Your second point: pins and not screws in the bracelet, you are correct. Your third point: no instant date change, with this fact you display your ignorance. You obviously chose to ignore the fact when I stated that my Speedmaster does indeed have instant date change. If you do not believe me I challenge you to visit an authorized Omega dealer and see for yourself.
"Next 1" Let us examine your facts on a point by point basis shall we? Your first point: OMEGA-very low re-sale value, to this I cannot speak as I admit I have no knowledge of re-sale value of Omegas or Rolexes. As I previously stated: The point in purchasing a luxury timepiece is not for its petty re-sale value (that indicates a person has short-sightedness) it is to care for the timepiece and pass it on to ones heirs.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines ignorance as: the condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. Stating the truth is never ignorant; by personally attacking me ISREAL53 you made suspect your own upbringing and parents aptitude to suitably raise children. Part of your reply to me read; Everything i said was true. You said my ignorance shows. Again you have shown your ignorance by stating Everything i (sic) said was true. Continues "Next 1"
someone has said Omega dont have crown gasket, I have 1991 Omega Seamaster from new ,3 years ago It had a factory (Swiss) reseal, it has a crown gasket !!! its worth stating also that it looks brand new despite a good amount of use, this can only be put down to excellent build quality to start with.
Further my Speedmaster has instant date change and gaskets in the crown. As for the movement many Omega movements are based on ETA ebauches and "anyone in the KNOW would know that" many higher end companies use ETA movements or ebauches. So having an "in-house" movement from Rolex is hardly anything to crow about which to crow. Lastly, ISREAL53 until you gain some real knowledge of the Swiss watch industry do not reply to me.
and Rolex and Omega being in the low end of a high end market
Your ignorance shows. Omega uses AISI 316L Austenitic stainless steel with excellent corrosion resistance. Rolex uses 904L stainless steel. 316L S.steel has 10-14% nickel content whereas 904L has 23-28% nickel, so it's hardly surprising that it's more corrosion resistant. But not very good for people with a nickel allergy. No watch manufacturers except Rolex consider it worth using the 904L steel, especially given that the price for 904L is approximately three times that of 316L.
I must disagree. The point in purchasing a luxury timepiece is not for it's petty re-sale value (that indicates a person has short-sightedness) it is to care for the timepiece and pass it on to ones heirs. My father at 83 still wears the Omega Seamaster my mother purchased for him 54 years ago and it still runs well and keeps excellent time (with proper maintenance of course). And all educated people agree that Patek Phillipe is the pinnacle of horological excellence.
I have a Submariner and I love my watch. For the price, I personally think Rolex is overprice and overrate. Yet, their design is timeless and the built quality is second to none. It is super durable. For those who is looking for a diving watch, check out Oris.
Omega is not on par with Rolex? I beg to differ. I use these watches for what they are designed for. Real Diving. not making a fashion statement. Rolex is a "me too" watch. "You have a rolex?...Me too" I have an Omega 300m chrono. best watch I have ever owned. I've had Rolex. It's good, but overrated.
Any pimp can buy a Rolex because it is so predictably recognized. It takes a person of refinement to look beyond the commonplace Rolex and research other luxury timepieces. I am thoroughly pleased with my Omega Speedmaster Day-Date and would never purchase a Rolex.
I agree the rolex is a better watch (slightly), but I do prefer the look and feel of the seamaster over the rolex. It's more comfortable for me, and I don't like the big date. The difference in the two materials has no practical difference or consequence. In the end, between the two, it really comes down to personal preference.
It's a Certified Chronometer, an award given only to the best automatic watches. If the time keeping was 'terrible' you either had a fake, a faulty watch, or had unrealistic expectations about a non-quartz watch.
If it were a real Omega, you simply could have sent it back under warranty and had them re-regulate it for you.
ive just got the same watch but quartz, second hand . i was getting blue dial but mix up in transit i got black. looking at it now ime not disappointed at all !.it is one good looking watch that ime proud to own.
sebastianflash64 3 weeks ago
como le pongo la hora a un reloj de estos?
cacopolidis 3 weeks ago
Is a nice watch... I'm still prefer blue dial with quartz... Easy to maintain overall.
MrKychin8 1 month ago
I prefer the Planet Ocean.
nameisunavailable82 2 months ago
nice, but I prefer the Bond GMT
bradfordquigley69 2 months ago
Comment removed
null140 2 months ago
yay!! thanks?
askewjohn 3 months ago
Poor quality SS it scratches very easy
saintEmory 3 months ago
I'm sad at how much these are skyrocketing in prices :(. I remember seeing used one for sale in great condition for ~$1,400 less than a year ago and that was a bit overpriced at the time.
Kyoretsu85 4 months ago
@Kyoretsu85 Good news if you own one!
breitlingsource 4 months ago
@Kyoretsu85 I totally agree! I just bought a new one on Michigan Avenue in Chicago, IL, and it cost me $3,800 ($4,200 after tax)!
Jason1Wang1 2 months ago
@Kyoretsu85 what skyrocketing prices did you see? I'm selling mine, the price so far is CHF 900.--.
frontloop71 2 months ago
dude can u review Oris Artix Complication grande lune
Thems 5 months ago
@Thems If I'm able to get one, I will for sure.
breitlingsource 5 months ago
@Thankx dude...!
Thems 5 months ago
I like the review very much! I'm a happy owner of the omega smp, simply my favorite watch! The watch is amazing when lights are out, perhaps you can add a few seconds by night next time..
pannenkoek28 6 months ago
@ISREAL53 You stated in your post, “I guess people who buy Rolex want more from a watch.” In the realm of luxury timepieces, Rolex simply subsists in the lower plane of the range. That particular brand is purchased by those of that stripe who are failingly and comically attempting to satisfy pathetic feeling of wanting to be seen as someone with class. Class tells you know and in your specific instance, it tells categorically nothing.
dhfun1 7 months ago
@ISREAL53 Those of us with means and actual discrimination gravitate towards true luxury when it comes to timepieces. We would never even consider procuring a Rolex. I myself own a Vacheron and Constantin. Further, given the choice between an Omega and a Rolex unequivocally the selection is Omega, well-chosen indeed. Of all the luxury watch brands with which I am familiar only Rolex possesses the reputation of screeching loudly and puerilely, “Here I am. Look at me. Look at me”.
dhfun1 7 months ago
@ISREAL53 All others retain and enjoy the appeal of understated magnificence and refinement. Perhaps in the future you should heed the advice of your betters and consider removing from your wrist that abomination you assume to be a fine timepiece.
dhfun1 7 months ago
@dhfun1 whoa. 'your BETTERS'? did you really just say that? are you suggesting your subjective opinion on class makes you this guy's 'better'? even if it's a belief of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, it's subjective. oh wow. yeah, that's class. i find there's a lot of stupidity in the working classes, but there's a shit-load of unfair chauvanism in the upper classes. christ. someone is ignorant of some facts, then tell them they're wrong. but there's no need to be a total prick. *Erieboy62*
null140 4 months ago
@null140 Anyway this has become tiresome. To “quote” you, you are ignorant of the use of the facts of the English language and you are wrong. Don’t bother to respond unless you can write properly and if you do consider responding you may want to reflect on the ancient Chinese saying that applies so fittingly to you in this situation, “Better to be thought of as a fool than to open one’s mouth (or in your case compose written material) and remove all doubt”.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 There is no such thing as daft “Blue Blood” here in the United States. We are too clever for that façade of dimwittedness that is used in the U.K. to hoodwink and bamboozle the masses. Over here we know that anyone and everyone in any part of the world bleeds red.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Mind you, I am speaking in economic terms here not sociologic terms. While we're on the subject, what’s with you Limeys and your sensitivity to “classes”. Null140 do you feel so downtrodden, put upon, and bad about yourself that you have to be so touchy in your grey little life to the class structure that is so inflexibly unshakable in “Jolly Old England? You see, that is why we kicked your ass out of the United States in the eighteenth century.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 I have not found a large amount of silly or unwise people in the working classes, just people with a lack of knowledge. A good example is your glaring ignorance of the proper use of the English language when you write which is a truly sad state of affairs indeed. As for the upper classes, there I must agree with you. However as a denizen of the true middle class I encounter for more people of the lower class than the upper class.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Now as to your rejoinder, no I did not say I was this persons better, I wrote it. Yes my opinion on class subjective or not does indeed make me “this guy’s” better. You wrote that you find there is a lot of stupidity in the working classes. I disagree. According to Cambridge dictionaries online the definition of stupidity is “the state of being silly or unwise”.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Seventh you wrote, oh wait this torture of being compelled to read your repulsive, putrid writing has finally ended! God be praised. Now, I reviewed everything I wrote and as best as I can ascertain, I made no errors in my composition. However, my review of my work was exceedingly difficult after being forced to wallow in the hog swill you call writing. Also, I was not very candid when I said I made no mistakes. I left two mistakes for you to find but I know you won’t, how sad.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Sixth you wrote, “christ. someone is ignorant of some facts, then tell them they're wrong. but there's no need to be a total prick.”
It should read, “Christ, if someone is ignorant of some facts, then tell them they're wrong but there's no need to be a total prick.”
4 errors, failure to capitalize the starting word of the sentence, “christ”, use of a period instead of a comma after “christ” failure to use the work “if” before the word “someone” and use of a period after the “wrong".
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Fifth you wrote, “i find there's a lot of stupidity in the working classes, but there's a shit-load of unfair chauvanism in the upper classes.”
It should read, “I find there's a lot of stupidity in the working classes, but there's a shit-load of unfair chauvinism in the upper classes.”
2 errors, failure to capitalize the beginning word and “chauvinism” was misspelled.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Fourth you wrote, “oh wow. yeah, that's class.”
It should read, “Oh wow, yeah that’s class.”
3 errors, you failed to capitalize the beginning word, a period instead of a comma after “wow” and an unneeded comma after “yeah”.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Third, you wrote, “even if it's a belief of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, it's subjective.”
It should read, “Even if it's a belief of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, it's subjective.”
1 error, once more you failed to capitalize the starting word of the sentence.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 Second, you wrote, “are you suggesting your subjective opinion on class makes you this guy's 'better'?”
It should read, “Are you suggesting your subjective opinion on class makes you this person’s “better”?”
3 errors, you did not capitalize “are” because it starts the query, you should have used “person’s” not “guy’s” and once again you failed to use double quotation marks with the word “better”.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 First, you wrote, “'your BETTERS'? did you really just say that?”
It should read, “Your BETTERS”, did you really just say that?
5 errors, you should have used double quotation marks with “your BETTERS”, capitalized the “y” in “yours”, not included the question mark after “BETTERS”, used a comma after BETTERS” and one should NEVER end a sentence with a preposition as you did, “that”.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@null140 I ask you, how do you expect me to accept such a poorly crafted reaction? Surely, you are jesting with this abomination of scripting, if that is what one can even call it. Now because I feel such pity for you since you are so clearly lacking in instruction of spelling and grammar, I will generously dole out some cerebral charity to you and point out the mistakes I found in hopes that in the future you may write properly.
dhfun1 2 months ago
@dhfun1 If you bothered to climb out of your ass, you might realize that you did not address my valid accusations of your personal character, and instead hid, like a turtle in his shell, behind a wall of cold, purely linguistic exposition. basically, you ignored me because if you didn't, it would hurt your feelings, and tried to palm me off by analysing and breaking down every single perfunctory detail of my technical linguistic error, without giving ANY time to the meaning behind my words.
null140 2 months ago
@null140 Hmm where am I to start? Yes of course, your atrocious and barbarous misuse of the King’s English. Your reply to me obviously created without any thought towards or wisdom of the English language is a fine example of personal impulsivity and simple-mindedness. Are you aware you wrote eighteen (18) spelling and grammatical errors in your response?
dhfun1 2 months ago
@dhfun1 Are you serious? I can't believe you actually have the time to do this sort of thing. And by the way, a guy who got eight A* grades in GCSE, including English Language and Literature, and a guy who was the only one to achieve an A in AS level English Language at my sixth form, is not as simple-minded as you think. You need to seek psychiatric help. That you made so many responses to my comment is, frankly, not normal at all.
null140 2 months ago
@dhfun1 Oh, by the way, I don't give a crap about how you think I should write a youtube comment; this is a relaxed social atmosphere, and one that I feel does not require a total level of formality. On what you will probably pick up on as a horrifically non sequitur, irrelevent personal note, if you have a significant other in your life, then I feel truly sorry for them.
null140 2 months ago
@dhfun1 You talked about class observations, and blue blood, but failed to give any conclusion, because you couldn't be bothered! You pretty much gave me a deceptively sophisticated "shut up." I recall many an ignorant fool telling me that, without any reason other than them not being able to end their 'argument' decisively.
null140 2 months ago
@dhfun1 Of course, to clarify in a succinct way, the true 'meaning behind my words', far from being about class observations, was in fact, "You, dhfun1, are an arrogant prick!" You avoided this point, by writing that you did not "say" you were "that guy's better", but that you "wrote" it. That was the end of it. You rebuked my later arguments, but gave no explanation for your belief that you are a better person than ISRAEL53; not to mention the fact that believing such, is purely egotistical.
null140 2 months ago
Comment removed
null140 2 months ago
@dhfun1 I could say that you misspelled "word" as "work", you failed to close your double quotation of "Jolly Old England" and your written style is quite bad! I would point to your second barrage on my own writing for examples; "You did not capitalize "are", which you should have since it starts the query... and once again you failed to place double quotation marks around the word "better". This would read a lot better than your attempt at silencing me. I'm seventeen years old, by the way.
null140 2 months ago
@ISREAL53 Lastly, after perusing the scores of comments on this article I seem to have found the one who appears to be your arch nemesis: Erieboy62 he stated, “Also, before you expound with your expertise on Omega and Rolex watches you should heed the ancient Chinese proverb which does applies to you in this situation: Better to be thought of as a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt.” Out of necessity I must concur unquestionably with what he said about you.
dhfun1 7 months ago
omega was a super and beautiful watches .
MrDan2626 9 months ago
it looks alittle to big
virginiatechfanx 9 months ago
how much does it costs? I seriously consider buying one.
Ichiban941987 11 months ago
@Ichiban941987 your lookin at 2-3 grand for the non bond version.
bigfootgunot 10 months ago
im finally getting an omega seamaster next week after years of wanting one :) unfortunately its not the co axial version as i cant quite afford that one,its exactley the same as the one in this vid but with battery power.i could have walked away with the blue face version,but i really want black(hence next week),im so excited :)
gamer1st 11 months ago
seeing this video makes me miss my Omega's...
jjlwis 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Learn how to meet women naneedj.info
montyamoraa 1 year ago
They don't make this anymore and is pretty much sold out everywhere. Pretty much the only way to find one is on the used market and they get swooped up fast.
Kyoretsu85 1 year ago
What's the price of this fine art pleace??
Greetz.
krakpatsboem 1 year ago
@krakpatsboem Probably between 2.5-3k.
trenken 1 year ago
I actually like the tubing bar system over the screws in the links.
The Seamaster, I believe has even 2 tubes in there over the standard 1 tube. The screws tend to unscrew themselves over a period of time even in Rolex's and Ebel's as well as other luxury brands that use the system (just physics - does not mean it's bad).
I personally think the tubing bar system is the most efficient/effective way of keeping the links in place over a long period of time as long as you know what you're doing
gabrideen 1 year ago
Couple pts; (1) the red dot seal between the screw-down case-back & the case, used by Omega to confirm the movement has not been tampered w/ since leaving the factory, has been around since at least the late 90s. Now Omega uses a blue dot (from approx 2006 on). Also if u send an Omega watch into an authorized service center for an overhaul it will come back w/ a blue dot seal.
And (2) unless u r a deep sea saturation diver the helium escape valve is utterly useless.
All said though, a gr8 watch
atrumira 1 year ago 2
@atrumira Interesting to hear 2006 associated with the Blue Dot. I've heard people talk about Blue Dot, but I have two Omegas from Mid-2008, and both have Red Dots.
breitlingsource 1 year ago
@breitlingsource You both are correct! Omegas still come with the red dot when bought new but when serviced at an Omega service center it will come back with the blue dot. Although if you give your watch a polish or really wear it, it tends to rub off.
Kyoretsu85 1 year ago
@Kyoretsu85 Thanks for clarifying that! Very handy information to know.
breitlingsource 1 year ago
When you put on an Omega your never supposed to take it off :P
abbath1586 1 year ago
GREAT Watch
2011shark 1 year ago
My seamaster has been very unreliable-Omega repaired it earlier in year (took them 3 MONTHS)!! One month later it failed again and they have had it for another 2 months so far..VERY POOR service from Omega. When I finally get it back I'll sell it and buy another watch, but DEFINITELY NOT ANOTHER OMEGA !!!
1cadillacman 1 year ago
@1cadillacman It must have been a fraud. Omega, is titanic shipshape. It is almost perfected.
"If you can afford the Bentley, why buy the Cadillac?"
idkhedidit 1 year ago
@idkhedidit - What must have been a fraud?? Bought watch from official Omega dealer, Omega UK repaired it( albeit not very well ), The Omega retailer told me they have many problems with very slow repair times with Omega and very poor customer service. Problem is Omega were swallowed up by Swatch who sell cheap crappy watches and dont care about customer service...
1cadillacman 1 year ago
got rid of mine and bought a ulysse nardin maxi marine, a universe away from this! just not in the same league
quintempo74 1 year ago
@quintempo74,
Ulysse Nardin... drool, very nice indeed.
I checked out their 1846 chronometer a while back, a real beaut with a superb movement - leagues better than anything Omega has to offer (& I'm an Omega junkie).
atrumira 1 year ago
wore this for sometime, very comfortable daily watch. well, until a lot of fake ones showed up......otherwise a nice watch, easy to read day and nite and handling vibrations pretty well.( Mountain Biking, LOL)
LuvUhDuh 1 year ago
Great Review!
WatchShopUScom 1 year ago
Honestly, I can't decide which color I should get. Blue and Black are both amazingly beautiful masterpieces.
damthatriver09 1 year ago
I would definitely wear this watch. only after I've mastered karate and self defense if anyone gonna rob me.
damthatriver09 1 year ago
this watch looks kind of simple. Why is it so expensive?
damthatriver09 1 year ago
@damthatriver09
About half the cost is for the case and the name Omega. The other half is for the the design/engineering/manufacture of the internal mechanical movement. It's a certified chronometer, which means each watch is tested to be accurate within a few seconds each day; remarkable for a something running on nothing but mechanical gearing and a spring. And, it's manufactured in Switzerland, which has high labor costs. Omega is actually one of the more affordable premium Swiss brands!
balios1 1 year ago
@balios1 Thanks for the information. How do you know so much?
damthatriver09 1 year ago
@damthatriver09
I'm no watch expert, that's just some pretty general info. I bought an Omega Seamaster last July and I'm pretty happy with it.
If you want to see what goes into a watch like this, you can go to Omega's website (omegawatches com) and click on the link at the bottom for "co-axial technology", there's a video showing similar watches being made. The video gives an idea why they cost a lot.
balios1 1 year ago
Too expensive for the working man!!!
CleverDjembe 1 year ago
I'd mud wrestle John Prescott to own this watch! lol :)
gelfling12345 1 year ago
thats one hellof expensive watch!
damthatriver09 1 year ago
@damthatriver09 Not really. This is an entry level priced watch. You want to see expensive check out Patek Phillippe or Zenith. Pricewise an Omega seamsater or speedmaster is a beater, that is a wear everywhere, all the time and in all conditions watch, and is built to be. Rolex and Breitling are in this category as well. All three companies have more expensive offerings too.
MrLuluapples 1 year ago
Do autos runn on electricity? Arent the mechanical ones safest during thunderstorms?
starfaery 1 year ago
@starfaery Mechanical watches dont have batteries. As or thunderstorms; your watch wont care no matter what movement it has. You will be dead long before the watch stops ticking in such situations. Strong magnetic fields might affect your watch but that doesnt really apply here.
qwasdninja 1 year ago
@qwasdninja Well you can atually survive lightening strikes with the right action taken.
Electrcity attracts electricity.
starfaery 1 year ago
@starfaery No, it doesnt. Opposite charges, however, do. No matter what watch you are wearing you will have the same probability to be hit by lightning. And you wont care about your watch if you get struck by lightning.
Its pure luck if you manage to survive getting hit, better to not get hit in the first place.
qwasdninja 1 year ago
@qwasdninja It does, that's why you shouldn't runn electricity during thunderstorms. There's a bigger chance of attracting electrical charges this way. If the watch attracted a strike, you will care about your watch.
And no it's not just pure luck. There are things you can do to avoid getting hit, and survive if you do, like kneeling, as tall things attracts lightening, opening your mouth as if it strikes to release exes pressure, thus minimizing impact, avoid standing under trees.
starfaery 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@qwasdninja It does, that's why you shouldn't runn electricity during thunderstorms. There's a bigger chance of attracting electrical charges this way. If the watch attracted a strike, you will care about your watch.
And no it's not just pure luck. There are things you can do to avoid getting hit, and survive if you do, like kneeling, as tall things attracts lightening, opening your mouth if it strikes to release exes pressure, thus minimizing impact, avoid standing under trees.
starfaery 1 year ago
@qwasdninja Not getting hit in the first place is my point.
However surviving, is not pure luck, there are rational factors playing in. like how charged the lightening, was what was the particular situation. How did the person go about things.
starfaery 1 year ago
@starfaery To say that it is pure luck is a very, very good approximation. One could, of course, argue that nothing is truly random though. If you get hit by lightning you are going to die, period. A breathtakingly small percent survive though, just like all people who shoot parts of their heads off dont die. It doesnt matter if you have a raincoat, do yoga och have your phone out. If lightning strikes nearby increases the chances of survival vs getting hit straight on.
qwasdninja 1 year ago
The best, most rugged, best looking dive / outdoor watch going, ever. None finer whether Quartz, but especially the Automatic Chronometer. Classicly marked in Super Luminova, no numbers and a black wave face. This watch sets the mark in looks, performance, and value.
gulfstreamnights 1 year ago
@breitlingsource Hey man, do you own all of these watches you have on here?
brian8793 1 year ago
reference number ???
vagos290189 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Amazing ROLLS-ROYCE Watches with 2 Gyrotourbillons
youtube.com/watch?v=TD-iaMpqOZY
Vezunchik87 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Amazing ROLLS-ROYCE Watches with 2 Gyrotourbillons
youtube.com/watch?v=TD-iaMpqOZY
Vezunchik87 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I have a Omega Seamaster watch for sell. Omega Seamaster Professional chronometer 600m/2000ft
Email: becollectables@hotmail.com ( Value 2200.00) Only asking 1500 cash or barter
calilifstylz 1 year ago
Of that year is your omega?
32youlube 1 year ago
i have an old omegai cant find it any where and i want to see price
crosmandudelol 1 year ago
I love my omega, I have the exact same one, I also have a ss submariner with date 1993 16610, next on my list is the planet ocean casino royale edition!
schumie 1 year ago
I WANT TO OMEGA WATCH
omega3861 1 year ago
Solid review with the MM figures. Thanks.
Zendrix3 1 year ago
This watch is nothing compared to my Oyster Perpetual date Submariner ^...^
ClausvonBulow 1 year ago
auto, the hand sweeps, and it says in the description
sjessebronson 1 year ago
you should do a review for the nail clippers.
mintyvision 1 year ago
would this be good with a leather band?
Whahli 1 year ago
mine stopped running in just over 2 years. $500 for servicing
shyamsasidharan1 1 year ago
@shyamsasidharan1 quartz or automatic ??
NielsUHP10 1 year ago
@NielsUHP10 Automatic.. 36 or 37mm Model. Bought from a dealer in Singapore. Just after the warranty ran out it stopped working. Got serviced in NY, they took about 3 months and $450
shyamsasidharan1 1 year ago
time to uload my 1965 ad1, let me hear
ThePuresa 1 year ago
Hi how much did your watch cost you when you bought it new?. Thanks.
Jacob88rOblivion 1 year ago
SUPERCOOL WATCH!!!
2011shark 1 year ago
I'm not that into watches but my god this is realy sumthin
04fergs 1 year ago
@dmanwhocan putting screws in would increase the cost of the watch? WTF aint it like 3grand? whats a few screws gonna do
americancops 1 year ago
nice kettle
honeythief98 1 year ago
this is the old model . is it available for sale yet ? what's the cost ?
vagos290189 2 years ago
I wear my Seamaster proudly every day, nice review, man!
radsag 2 years ago
i prefer my omega constellation of 1966 but your watch is very nice man!!!!
chocoboy1234 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
how long does the battery last?
heracles89 2 years ago
LOL
xNoobFromHell 2 years ago
@heracles89 this watch doesn't run on batteries ;) it is powered by the movement of your hands
terabytenine11 2 years ago
@terabytenine11. all the omega batteries run on batteries. rolex watches are the ones that are powered by motion.
airborne101st45 1 year ago
@airborne101st45 hahaha i mean watches
airborne101st45 1 year ago
1. this makes no sense
2. omega makes plenty of automatic watches
3. batteries are more accurate
boddingtons25 1 year ago
@airborne101st45 LoL. . omega watches are AUTOMATIC... ;) doesn't run on batteries dude.. do some research...
terabytenine11 1 year ago
I bought my first omega bond version co-axial 2220.80, after wearing citizen eco-drive for half decade or so (Awesome technology/ Accuracy, and affordable, i.e. blue angel & Caliber 8700 series...). I honestly must say that it took some courage to put all this money in the Omega,
but I'm glad I did, the watch has a nice look, the weight is about right, I like the sapphire crystal, something the citizen lacks, at the exception for limited editions. Co-axial vs Eco-drive,Japanese vs Swiss,all good
elgalou 2 years ago
Comment removed
SAMURAISWORD1000 2 years ago
And why is that?
RandallJonesey 2 years ago
This is my favorite watch I've ever owned. It's incredible, reliable, beautiful, incredible, and incredible.
Idn42 2 years ago 19
@Idn42 How reliable?
damthatriver09 1 year ago
@Idn42 do you have the 41mm ?
MrZol 1 year ago
@Idn42 is it better then rolex?
toRieper 1 year ago
@Idn42
Yep: it's all that and then some =)
CleverDjembe 1 year ago
I GOT 1 OF THESE
WAAAAZAAAAAAAAA 2 years ago
I generally prefer tag heuer over omega. I prefer there sportier direction as oposed to the gentlemans watch. However in saying that my favourite watch is the omega seamaster with the blue bezel. ie the bond watch. Damn its a nice watch. I wear a tag f1. Great value for money watch without spending big dollars.
THEDROPPEDSOCK 2 years ago
LOL, you prefer Tags quartz watches over an ETA 2892 A2. WOW! That's just weird. It's like saying I prefer a volkswagon over a BMW.
k0d0kan 2 years ago 2
@k0d0kan
Well quartz is both more reliable and accurate than any mechanical work. The difference is of course prestige. You don't buy luxury watches to tell time better. A 10$ watch is likely to work just as well as a $2000 one. You buy the because of the prestige and the luxury of having them. Or just because you enjoy watches as I do.
valensmann 1 year ago
i have a similar omega (but the blue dial and its quartz - much better accuracy) - I'm also a diver... have to be honest, spending $200 on a decent dive computer by suunto or oceanic is far safer/better value than spending $2000 on an omega or rolex! these watches are great for when you need to dress smart for a wedding, and coll down the pub, but REAL divers tend not to bother wearing watches when a decent dive computer does it all for you.
cheltcanary 2 years ago 3
Diving watches are a tradition, there weren't always dive computers.
JACKtheRIPP3R189 2 years ago
jesus, i love omega
xsichtsbash2k6 2 years ago
cumshot
elcriticonomega 2 years ago 18
@elcriticonomega what you mean cumshot? i just started the video while noticing this fucking retarded comment you stupid fuck!
virginiatechfanx 9 months ago
I'm thinking to buy an Omega watch but I cannot choose. The choices is between the Omega Seamster 300M 212.30.41.61.01.001, the Omega Limited Edition James Bond 212.30.41.20.01.002 or the Omega Seamaster James Bond Mens 300m Chronograph 213.30.42.40.01.001.
I really dislike the whole automatic thing instead of the battery, but that's my opinion. Can some one give me some info about what watch, some opinions?
Anyways, thats a beautiful watch you have!
TeabagTore 2 years ago
how much are omega's on average?
TotaIbrutaL 2 years ago
I'd guess about 2500 dollars. It all depends on which movement you want. The quartz are the "cheapest". Here in Norway the Omega Seamaster quartz is 14.300 nok, which is 2500 dollars.
TeabagTore 2 years ago
To review: you made seven points, point two was true, points one and five are non-sequitor, with points three, four, six and seven you display your ignorance.
Lastly ISREAL53 if you reply to me, no personal attacks on me, stick to the subject at hand. Also, before you expound with your expertise on Omega and Rolex watches you should heed the ancient Chinese proverb which does applies to you in this situation: Better to be thought of as a fool than to opens ones mouth and remove all doubt.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
If the Speedmaster has no gasket in the crown, how then can it be water resistant to the depth of one-hundred meters? Also all one need do is explore the official Omega website to see that most, if not all, Omega watches are water resistant to some degree which would tell anyone with common sense that Omega crowns do indeed have gaskets..
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Your final point: no gaskets in the crown with this final fact you again display your ignorance. As I previously stated my Speedmaster does indeed have a gasket in the crown and as jezztech stated about his Seamaster: it has a crown gasket !!!. My Speedmaster is water resistant to one-hundred meters yet you state Omega watches have no gaskets in the crown, which begs the question;
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Further, Rolex watch case backs and bracelets are all made of 316 L S. steel. Combining these facts one can see that Omega bezels are hardly tinny. When you stated Omega bezels were tinny, perhaps you were mistaken and meant to refer to Rolex case backs and bracelets?
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Rolex uses 904L stainless steel. 316L S. steel has 10-14% nickel content whereas 904L has 23-28% nickel, so it's hardly surprising that it's more corrosion resistant. But not very good for people with a nickel allergy. No watch manufacturers except Rolex consider it worth using the 904L steel, especially given that the price for 904L is approximately three times that of 316L.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Your fifth point: small date, since you did not specify I can only assume that it is the Cyclops Lens found on Rolexes to which you are referring. I put this down to personal preference of the owner. Your sixth point: not the best quality steel, tinny bezel, with this fact you again display your ignorance. As I previously stated, Omega uses AISI 316L Austenitic stainless steel with excellent corrosion resistance. Rolex uses 904L stainless steel.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
which you yourself have acknowledged as being higher-end than Rolex and Omega, use not only in-house movements but ETA movements as well. So the fact that your Rolex has an in-house movement is hardly anything about which to crow.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Your fourth point: no in house movement, with this fact you again display your ignorance. My Speedmaster is indeed based upon the ETA 7750 movement. However though Omega does use ETA movements (that are modified in-house by Omega such as the ETA 7750), Omega does indeed produce some movements in-house. It is also a widely known fact that many of the finer watchmakers,
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Your second point: pins and not screws in the bracelet, you are correct. Your third point: no instant date change, with this fact you display your ignorance. You obviously chose to ignore the fact when I stated that my Speedmaster does indeed have instant date change. If you do not believe me I challenge you to visit an authorized Omega dealer and see for yourself.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
"Next 1" Let us examine your facts on a point by point basis shall we? Your first point: OMEGA-very low re-sale value, to this I cannot speak as I admit I have no knowledge of re-sale value of Omegas or Rolexes. As I previously stated: The point in purchasing a luxury timepiece is not for its petty re-sale value (that indicates a person has short-sightedness) it is to care for the timepiece and pass it on to ones heirs.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
The American Heritage Dictionary defines ignorance as: the condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. Stating the truth is never ignorant; by personally attacking me ISREAL53 you made suspect your own upbringing and parents aptitude to suitably raise children. Part of your reply to me read; Everything i said was true. You said my ignorance shows. Again you have shown your ignorance by stating Everything i (sic) said was true. Continues "Next 1"
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
someone has said Omega dont have crown gasket, I have 1991 Omega Seamaster from new ,3 years ago It had a factory (Swiss) reseal, it has a crown gasket !!! its worth stating also that it looks brand new despite a good amount of use, this can only be put down to excellent build quality to start with.
jezztech 2 years ago
Omega is at the end of high end watches. The starting point.
onetwothree123123321 2 years ago
Further my Speedmaster has instant date change and gaskets in the crown. As for the movement many Omega movements are based on ETA ebauches and "anyone in the KNOW would know that" many higher end companies use ETA movements or ebauches. So having an "in-house" movement from Rolex is hardly anything to crow about which to crow. Lastly, ISREAL53 until you gain some real knowledge of the Swiss watch industry do not reply to me.
and Rolex and Omega being in the low end of a high end market
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Your ignorance shows. Omega uses AISI 316L Austenitic stainless steel with excellent corrosion resistance. Rolex uses 904L stainless steel. 316L S.steel has 10-14% nickel content whereas 904L has 23-28% nickel, so it's hardly surprising that it's more corrosion resistant. But not very good for people with a nickel allergy. No watch manufacturers except Rolex consider it worth using the 904L steel, especially given that the price for 904L is approximately three times that of 316L.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
I must disagree. The point in purchasing a luxury timepiece is not for it's petty re-sale value (that indicates a person has short-sightedness) it is to care for the timepiece and pass it on to ones heirs. My father at 83 still wears the Omega Seamaster my mother purchased for him 54 years ago and it still runs well and keeps excellent time (with proper maintenance of course). And all educated people agree that Patek Phillipe is the pinnacle of horological excellence.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
I have a Submariner and I love my watch. For the price, I personally think Rolex is overprice and overrate. Yet, their design is timeless and the built quality is second to none. It is super durable. For those who is looking for a diving watch, check out Oris.
kkra3 2 years ago
Omega is also a good watch,but Rolex is legend!
twinkk 2 years ago
Comment removed
twinkk 2 years ago
Omega is not on par with Rolex? I beg to differ. I use these watches for what they are designed for. Real Diving. not making a fashion statement. Rolex is a "me too" watch. "You have a rolex?...Me too" I have an Omega 300m chrono. best watch I have ever owned. I've had Rolex. It's good, but overrated.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Any pimp can buy a Rolex because it is so predictably recognized. It takes a person of refinement to look beyond the commonplace Rolex and research other luxury timepieces. I am thoroughly pleased with my Omega Speedmaster Day-Date and would never purchase a Rolex.
ErieBoy62 2 years ago
Get a Seiko Monster instead!
killerkrk 2 years ago
I agree the rolex is a better watch (slightly), but I do prefer the look and feel of the seamaster over the rolex. It's more comfortable for me, and I don't like the big date. The difference in the two materials has no practical difference or consequence. In the end, between the two, it really comes down to personal preference.
numbcheese 2 years ago
I have owned a Rolex before,,, I wasnt impressed,,, I have enjoyed my Omega's alot more.
diamondmoney007 2 years ago
I have this watch with the blue face. I bought in 2004, I simply love it.
G1OVANN11 2 years ago
oh mine is automatic
G1OVANN11 2 years ago
i love you xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
revolutions88 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
kinda a ripp off of a rolex still great tho
aidyanimal 2 years ago
you obviously don`t much about watches
revolutions88 2 years ago
so what
aidyanimal 2 years ago
you obviously don't know much about grammar
0ldSandwich 2 years ago 2
Excellent review as usual!
KeepTheTime 2 years ago
how much does it cost???
wrobe00011 2 years ago
Awesome review!! I stack Omega against Rolex any day of the week. I have had the blue face,, great watch, but it would be nice to have screws
diamondmoney007 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I cant understand why are they so excpensive.I like SEIKO better.
xNoobFromHell 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Just sold my seamaster pro, timekeeping on it was terrible!.
stuprestonexperience 2 years ago
It's a Certified Chronometer, an award given only to the best automatic watches. If the time keeping was 'terrible' you either had a fake, a faulty watch, or had unrealistic expectations about a non-quartz watch.
If it were a real Omega, you simply could have sent it back under warranty and had them re-regulate it for you.
ZCT808 2 years ago 15