My Sochi has arrived
Discussion
First impressions (not had chance to wear it yet as work is manic): Its huge compared to my Chrono Pro, which is big in itself! Love the look of the ceramic bezel with coloured markers. Nearly tripped and fell into a new green ceramic sub on my way to paying too. Maybe that one after xmas.
dazp said:
That is very nice indeed.
Would love to get one of these but need to save a few more penny's first
Yeah, they are not as well priced as they once were. I paid (well my wife did) £1700 for my chrono in 2005 which was a pricey Omega at the time. Now you wont get an equivalent example for less than £3k. The Sochi should have been a smidge under £4200 which is Rolex money. I wouldn't have bought it if I was paying full price! Omegas are lovely but not £4k lovely. Would love to get one of these but need to save a few more penny's first
ecain63 said:
The Sochi should have been a smidge under £4200 which is Rolex money. I wouldn't have bought it if I was paying full price! Omegas are lovely but not £4k lovely.
why do you think a Rolex is worth £4k then ?I would much rather a Omega, and the build on the new ones matches Rolex . (I would even say the new Omegas are better built)
when you starting looking at Sub Rolex money you can get a TI PO liquid metal, imo no contest when you look at the tech in this watch.
yummy
mrdemon said:
why do you think a Rolex is worth £4k then ?
I would much rather a Omega, and the build on the new ones matches Rolex . (I would even say the new Omegas are better built)
when you starting looking at Sub Rolex money you can get a TI PO liquid metal, imo no contest when you look at the tech in this watch.
To answer your first question David; quality, history, longevity, design, material, re-sale value and last but not least, prestige.I would much rather a Omega, and the build on the new ones matches Rolex . (I would even say the new Omegas are better built)
when you starting looking at Sub Rolex money you can get a TI PO liquid metal, imo no contest when you look at the tech in this watch.
I have the Liquidmetal PO chronograph and the Rolex Sea-Dweller Deepsea, the 'flagship dive models' for both brands - build quality is about the same, yes; the Omega is not better, but it a quantum shift from the old Bond Seamasters and the first generation Planet Ocean (I have owned them all).
Features differ though, and one novelty bezel material does not make it a technical tour-de force.
Omega; nice in house co-ax chrono, very easy to read registers, Grade 5 Ti is really, really nice, Liquidmetal is pointless but attractive, great lume with diferent colours (nice idea but you can't really see it!) crystal caseback and still maintains 600m WR. It's actually the watch I will take on holiday with me from now on and it's brilliant having that chrono able to operated at maximum WR depth (even though I only snorkel!).
Rolex; insane water resistance of 3900m (plus 25%), Ringlock case, Ti caseback, brilliant instant bracelet adjustment, all-night lume, cool 5mm domed crystal. The 'tech' on this watch far outweighs the Omega from an engineering perspective; it has to to achieve that WR rating, which is of course pointless, but so are mechanical dive watches anyway
The Rolex will also hold and increase it's value, sadly the Omega won't, which is a shame as it deserves to. Hopefully Omega will take a longer term view, stop diso
ing and get the delaers to keep the second hand values up like Patek and Rolex do. I really love my PO!
And back on topic; that Sochi is stunning!
it is odd that I went into my local shop and they stated no discount on the sub but they would on the Omega.
I think that's why people love Rolex, the resale is awesome, And that name seems to be the watch to wear. when you think a Sub was only 3k not long ago and now the cheapest dealers ones with box and papers is over 4k. you can buy these, wear them and resell for maybe even more than you paid.
I looked at the 16610LV Sub (I do like it and it matches my Cayman R of course) but in London the only one for sale was £6.2k was is £4.3k new !!! 2k above rrp !! I got him down to £6k but that's crazy money imo.
scary how Rolex hold the money when every shop in London I went in had rows and rows of them. but very few 2nd hand Ceramic Omega's for sale saying that the only SMPC for sale is at 2.3k so not bad at holding the money atm when you think new they are sold discounted.
I have ended up buying a 2nd hand SMPC off TZ as I cannot afford a Ti PO in blue atm but I do love that watch after seeing it in real life.
So after lusting after a 16610LV and the silly London prices, I ended up with another seamaster, all be it my new one vs my 15 year old one is night and day in quality, I am stunned by just have great it looks.
Would I like a Rolex, yes I think so but the older case design for me, which means missing out on the newer bracelet.
the new design does not wear well on my smaller wrist and the step from case to bracelet is ugly, where the 16610 or 14060M sit and look really nice. but I'll hold out for a 16610LV when I go to the states as they are much cheaper there.
I think that's why people love Rolex, the resale is awesome, And that name seems to be the watch to wear. when you think a Sub was only 3k not long ago and now the cheapest dealers ones with box and papers is over 4k. you can buy these, wear them and resell for maybe even more than you paid.
I looked at the 16610LV Sub (I do like it and it matches my Cayman R of course) but in London the only one for sale was £6.2k was is £4.3k new !!! 2k above rrp !! I got him down to £6k but that's crazy money imo.
scary how Rolex hold the money when every shop in London I went in had rows and rows of them. but very few 2nd hand Ceramic Omega's for sale saying that the only SMPC for sale is at 2.3k so not bad at holding the money atm when you think new they are sold discounted.
I have ended up buying a 2nd hand SMPC off TZ as I cannot afford a Ti PO in blue atm but I do love that watch after seeing it in real life.
So after lusting after a 16610LV and the silly London prices, I ended up with another seamaster, all be it my new one vs my 15 year old one is night and day in quality, I am stunned by just have great it looks.
Would I like a Rolex, yes I think so but the older case design for me, which means missing out on the newer bracelet.
the new design does not wear well on my smaller wrist and the step from case to bracelet is ugly, where the 16610 or 14060M sit and look really nice. but I'll hold out for a 16610LV when I go to the states as they are much cheaper there.
mrdemon said:
why do you think a Rolex is worth £4k then
As per what Yeti said:"To answer your first question David; quality, history, longevity, design, material, re-sale value and last but not least, prestige."
For me, spending £4k to quickly lose half on depreciation is a bit daft. Thats what happens with most Omega watches. With a Rolex you don't have that concern.
Got a good days use of the Sochi today. A very nice wear indeed.
ecain63 said:
mrdemon said:
why do you think a Rolex is worth £4k then
As per what Yeti said:"To answer your first question David; quality, history, longevity, design, material, re-sale value and last but not least, prestige."
For me, spending £4k to quickly lose half on depreciation is a bit daft. Thats what happens with most Omega watches. With a Rolex you don't have that concern.
Got a good days use of the Sochi today. A very nice wear indeed.
mrdemon said:
People flip them so fast though.
I like to buy some thing I want to wear, so price is not that much of an issue.
Seems odd to me this Rolex fetish when no one wants to keep them.
I've had my Sea-Dweller over 10 years I like to buy some thing I want to wear, so price is not that much of an issue.
Seems odd to me this Rolex fetish when no one wants to keep them.
Recently flipped my Daytona and Explorer II but had had them 6 and 8 years respectively. It is just nice to know that when you fancy something else, they've made you money Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff