why should I buy

[bordseye]

A rolex SeaDweller in steel for £9300 when I can buy an Omega Seamaster coaxial for £4300

https://www.omegawatches.com/en-gb/watch-omega-sea...
https://www.rolex.com/watches/configure.html#/sea-...

Leaving aside aesthetics and personal preferences ( I like bright colours), it seems to me that both fullfill the same horological function. So the only difference can be the financial argument that the Rolex might well appreciate whereas the Omega isnt likely to do so.

Am I right?

[richthebike]

I think the answer is to buy what you like.

If you prefer the Omega then get it. It also happens to be less money.

[alistair1234]

Or this https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/omega-seamaster-p...

[Crumpet]

Well, the Planet Ocean would be a more direct comparison, but I’d tend to agree.



I have both and there’s genuinely not much between them. The Rolex feels ever so slightly better made but I think the Omega has the more interesting movement (and is more accurate). I don’t wear the SD really, it’s too flashy, too noticeable and too much of a target for for thieves - at least for an everyday watch.

Then again, the PO isn’t exactly understated! I prefer the PO but the SD does feel ever-so-slightly more special. The SD is actually pretty easy to get hold of!

[Wills2]

bordseye said:

A rolex SeaDweller in steel for £9300 when I can buy an Omega Seamaster coaxial for £4300

https://www.omegawatches.com/en-gb/watch-omega-sea...
https://www.rolex.com/watches/configure.html#/sea-...

Leaving aside aesthetics and personal preferences ( I like bright colours), it seems to me that both fullfill the same horological function. So the only difference can be the financial argument that the Rolex might well appreciate whereas the Omega isnt likely to do so.

Am I right?

Buy the Rolex (I'm assuming you've been offered one hence your question) then sell for a 2k profit, then get the Omega for essentially half price plus any other discount available.

[Dezbo]

The key question here is can the OP buy the Rolex if that’s what they want? I know SeaDwellers are one of the easier stainless sports Rolexes to get hold of but you’re not gonna be able to walk into an AD and buy one without purchase history or some amount of waiting time

[glazbagun]

Wrong Omega. Apart from the colour scheme and seconds hand (which may be your thing), it has the Cal 2507 which is a variant of the old 2500. If you want like for like I'd pick something with the Cal 8500.

[Wills2]

glazbagun said:

Wrong Omega. Apart from the colour scheme and seconds hand (which may be your thing), it has the Cal 2507 which is a variant of the old 2500. If you want like for like I'd pick something with the Cal 8500.

Nothing wrong the 2500 movement.

[AllyM]

Because the alternative is a POS.

[bordseye]

Wills2 said:

Buy the Rolex (I'm assuming you've been offered one hence your question) then sell for a 2k profit, then get the Omega for essentially half price plus any other discount available.

Your assumption is wrong. I am thinking of treating myself to an upmarket watch for every day use but am finding the choice bewildering. So trying to get a feel of what is good and what is less good.

To put it in car terms, I know that a Ferrari is a better buy than a Porker ( well it is - no question ) but I dont know that a Rolex is a better buy than an Omega. All this talk of Cal this and that is just confusing to me whereas I know that a Ferrari has a better engine whether V8 or V12.

Edited by bordseye on Thursday 14th October 08:38

[Jamescrs]

AllyM said:

Because the alternative is a POS.

Only on Pistonheads would someone post this kind of rubbish....

[Barchettaman]

Yeah, he does write some odd things.

[covmutley]

The rolex has a 70 hour power reserve compared to 48 on the omega and is water resistant to 1220m compared to the 300 of the omega.

I'm not sure if the omega bezel is ceramic like the rolex? I think many will also argue that the rolex bracelets are very good.

But I think the biggest issue is that you won't be able to pick up a new sea dweller for retail price, and will have to spend more for a second hand one instead.

[bordseye]

Jamescrs said:

Only on Pistonheads would someone post this kind of rubbish....

Obviously a Porsche man!

But to be serious, what I was trying to say is that I simply dont know what is a good watch and what isnt, never previously having had any interest in the subject. On the other hand I have been a life long petrolhead so with cars and bikes I do have my own personal pro and con ratings for the various makes.

From reading posts on this forum, it seems to me that there are 4 criteria people use to judge a watch:

1/ do I like the look of it?
2/ build quality - movement and construction
3/ investment potential - will I take a bath on it, will it simply hold its own, will it go up in value
4/ pose potential - Rolex rates higher than Casio

Few on here will openly admit to 3 and 4 but they are very real as you can see from you tube videos ( the pose element) and from the second hand market prices ( the money element).

Edited by bordseye on Thursday 14th October 13:19

[Barchettaman]

https://seesternwatches.com/shop/ols/products/sub-...

£130 and will fulfill the same horological function!

[bordseye]

Barchettaman said:

https://seesternwatches.com/shop/ols/products/sub-...

£130 and will fulfill the same horological function!

Likely thats true but then timekeeping is not what its about, is it? My phone tells me the time and if thats not accurate enough I can use the browser to the atomic clock. My daily watch is a Seiko Kinetic divers watch - the second that I have had, the first being nicked by someone in the changing room at the marina showers in Guernsey. Its bulletproof. Likely was more accurate than a Sub, does not need a serice ever. So thinking entirely rationally, why buy anything else.

Which is where my 4 points come in. So far I reckon:
1/ I like the look of the Omega
2/ havent a clue which is better built
3/ Quick sccot through Watchfinder tells me that Rolex is a better buy financially
4/ Has to be Rolex

Right?

Edited by bordseye on Thursday 14th October 13:31

[RedWhiteMonkey]

covmutley said:

The rolex has a 70 hour power reserve compared to 48 on the omega and is water resistant to 1220m compared to the 300 of the omega.

I'm not sure if the omega bezel is ceramic like the rolex? I think many will also argue that the rolex bracelets are very good.

But I think the biggest issue is that you won't be able to pick up a new sea dweller for retail price, and will have to spend more for a second hand one instead.

I suppose the power reserve thing could be relevant if not worn everyday or not kept on a winder but the water resistance thing is purely pointless. 40 metres is the general depth limit for recreational (but qualified) scuba divers. Who actually needs a watch that can go to 400m, let alone 1220m.

Buy whichever one you prefer the look of.

[covmutley]

RedWhiteMonkey said:

I suppose the power reserve thing could be relevant if not worn everyday or not kept on a winder but the water resistance thing is purely pointless. 40 metres is the general depth limit for recreational (but qualified) scuba divers. Who actually needs a watch that can go to 400m, let alone 1220m.

Buy whichever one you prefer the look of.

I don't disagree at all. But the OP was asking about the price difference, and both the depth and power reserve are largely irrelevant to most, but will party explain the cost difference.

[Richard-390a0]

AllyM said:

Because the alternative is a POS.

Planet Ocean Seamaster?

[anonymous-user]

You are making this unnecessarily complicated

Just buy what you like and would be happy wearing. Only you can answer that question, there is not much point in asking us as it is a personal decision. Maybe try some on if you can and get a feel for what you like.

I buy whatever watches I like like look of, and that appear roughly the right size for my wrist.

I don't really give much of a toss about:
The movement.
The power reserve (if Automatic/winding).
The water resistance levels.
The build quality or finishing.
The lume.
The complications.

(Build quality and water resistance within reason. Clearly I wouldn't buy a watch with no water resistance to go and wear in a pool or in the sea)

I'm very much visual person. I know instantly from looking at something whether I want to buy it or not.

Same as buying classic or sports cars really. I buy cars I like the look of. Cars I find visually appealing or visually exciting. Thats about it. Not particularly interested in the build quality, the engine, or the reliability.

Some people are into collecting/buying watches because of the movements, the complications, the build quality, the history etc, and that is great, but you need to decide if you are one of those people or a more 'simple' visual buyer such as me, or a bit of both.