# Omega V Rolex



## ollyhock

Which watch brand do you think is best? omega or rolex.

i personally having repaired both, think that the new omega's are better although i think the co-axial escapement is of no real advantage(imo).

i like the fact that omega have gone with the trend of oversized cases , as my rolex now always looks that much smaller.

both great watches tried and tested but which is best taking into account all the factors

quality

looks

resale value

AD availability

customer care


----------



## bobbymonks

ollyhock said:


> Which watch brand do you think is best? omega or rolex.
> 
> i personally having repaired both, think that the new omega's are better although i think the co-axial escapement is of no real advantage(imo).
> 
> i like the fact that omega have gone with the trend of oversized cases , as my rolex now always looks that much smaller.
> 
> both great watches tried and tested but which is best taking into account all the factors
> 
> quality
> 
> looks
> 
> resale value
> 
> AD availability
> 
> customer care


I have both a Sub & Speedie and in the terms above for comparison I would say they are about equal. Although due to Brand popularity and bling factor Rolex's are over-priced for what you actually get.

Any town in UK with a Rolex AD will have an Omega AD, or if your town has a Goldsmiths they do both!

It is each to their own, but I have always looked at it like this.

If you compare both brands as cars (bear with me)

Rolex = BMW

Omega = Mercedes

Both very good german engineered cars, but one has a brashness & look at me image to it and tends to attract a certain cliental.

The other has more class and attracts a reserved kind of person.

So in a nut shell there isn't a best brand, it depends on you.

If you go higher up the market the same thing happens which is better, AP, VC or PP?

I'm Bi-polar so I have both (cars & watches) but that's my problem and his


----------



## bobjames

I have both brands and to my mind there is no question that Rolex is a better watch based on design, resale and feel. However there are some models of Omega, Speedmaster or Seamaster 2254.50 that are real quality in terms of build and looks and they offer super value for money.

Overall though i was forced to choose i would choose Rolex everytime


----------



## Andy Tims

bobbymonks said:


> It is each to their own, but I have always looked at it like this.
> 
> If you compare both brands as cars (bear with me)
> 
> Rolex = BMW
> 
> Omega = Mercedes
> 
> Both very good german engineered cars, but one has a brashness & look at me image to it and tends to attract a certain cliental.
> 
> The other has more class and attracts a reserved kind of person.


Top stereotyping - like your work 

I have both brands of watch, but not what I'd call "brash" versions in the least.

To try & help the OP I'd say buy what you like most, but Rolex Sports models are well known for holding their value, especially if you buy well, which usually means pre-owned.


----------



## Roger

Having owned a number examples of both, I would say...........

Omega, value for money and well built. (although the " Bond" versions seem popular with the Chavs.)

Rolex, better built and better residuals.

Roger


----------



## Griff

They've both got a long way to go to match Seiko h34r:


----------



## Regal325

They've both got a long way to go to match Seiko And Seiko have a long way to go to match Alpha


----------



## Defender

Griff said:


> They've both got a long way to go to match Seiko h34r:


So continuing the car company analogy, who would you equate Seiko to then?

Best regards,

Defender.


----------



## Regal325

So continuing the car company analogy, who would you equate Seiko to then?

Datsun Cherry, many know them, not so many want them :lol:


----------



## Parabola

Nissan because they do everything from a reliable run of the mill car to the GT-R


----------



## mjolnir

Regal325 said:


> So continuing the car company analogy, who would you equate Seiko to then?
> 
> Datsun Cherry, many know them, not so many want them :lol:


I don't think there are many companies that give you as much watch for your money as Seiko.

Seems strange to try and equate a company that makes the Marine Master series or the springdrive technology to an old Datsun :huh:

Edit: Now look! You've made me want a Marine Master 300 again. Damn it.


----------



## Griff

Defender said:


> Griff said:
> 
> 
> 
> They've both got a long way to go to match Seiko h34r:
> 
> 
> 
> So continuing the car company analogy, who would you equate Seiko to then?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Defender.
Click to expand...

Lexus


----------



## Defender

Datsun Cherry, many know them, not so many want them :lol:


----------



## Defender

Lexus


----------



## Griff

SOMEBODY PLEASE SHOOT THIS FREAKING THREAD OR I'LL SCREAM!!!!!!!


----------



## Parabola

Griff said:


> SOMEBODY PLEASE SHOOT THIS FREAKING THREAD OR I'LL SCREAM!!!!!!!


I believe capital letters are the internet version of screaming. :tongue2: :lol:


----------



## frogspawn

Griff said:


> SOMEBODY PLEASE SHOOT THIS FREAKING THREAD OR I'LL SCREAM!!!!!!!


Love the way the colours merge in that piccy (going OT :lol:







:cry2: )


----------



## Boxbrownie

+1 Griff.......when I saw the post title I thought......here we go again :lol:

and Chavs.......... :tongue2:


----------



## thorpey69

So what about Rolls Royce??? == Patek???

Silly thread without any possible conclusive out come,i predict it being locked or moved within 5 pages :tongue2: :lol:


----------



## gregory

My friend purchased a Rolex Submariner about a month ago, the same time as I purchased my Speedie.

His has gone back into the jewellers in Harrogate to be re-calibrated, it was out by quite a bit.

Mine is probably gaining about eight seconds a week, superb for a manual movement. It's out by a second a day. That's ridiculously good.

However, I wouldn't even begin to suggest that my Omega is better than his Rolex.

I would just imagine he got a watch that was out.

Horses for courses, as always, I would say!!

Again, I would love to own a Rolex too, but I think I am gonna struggle, especially since re-joining here.

If I had Â£125 yesterday, I would have nailed a gorgeous French big chunky orange faced diver by Beuchat...

But more importantly, I would have nailed Alas's Doxa Carribean Sub if I had a spare Â£975!!!

That Rolex isn't gonna happen... I just don't have the willpower to save up... there's too much good stock going through when I have more sheckles in the bank!!! :lol:


----------



## Picasso

I would say Rolexes are more like Hummers: Blingy & mainly bought by rappers.


----------



## BondandBigM

Picasso said:


> I would say Rolexes are more like Hummers: Blingy & mainly bought by rappers.


More excellent stereotyping

I've got a Redneck pick up truck and the last time I was on the Karaoke I was so bad the guy turned the mike off but wear I a Rolex, go figure that one out

:lol: :lol:


----------



## SharkBike

Picasso said:


> I would say Rolexes are more like Hummers: Blingy & mainly bought by rappers.


Like this?










:huh:


----------



## Picasso

BondandBigM said:


> Picasso said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would say Rolexes are more like Hummers: Blingy & mainly bought by rappers.
> 
> 
> 
> More excellent stereotyping
Click to expand...

Thanks, I try my best.

If it makes you feel any better, I'm not a big fan of Omegas either.


----------



## BondandBigM

Picasso said:


> BondandBigM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picasso said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would say Rolexes are more like Hummers: Blingy & mainly bought by rappers.
> 
> 
> 
> More excellent stereotyping
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks, I try my best.
> 
> If it makes you feel any better, I'm not a big fan of Omegas either.
Click to expand...

Neither am I but I wouldn't admit it on here h34r:

:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## oubaas56

Come on guys! This particular can of worms has been opened so many times it's just not real.

At the end of the day they're only watches. Stanley Mathews is reputed to have said about football

" It's not a matter of life and death, it's much more important than that."

The watch you like/don't like is, in the final analysis, a matter of personal taste and that is very subjective.

Both Rolex and Omega make some very fine watches, no doubt about it, but what floats your boat is entirely

down to you. Your choice of watch is ultimately based on what you can afford/turns you on.

Bit like going on the pull really. "Don't like the look of yours" when on another day you would quite happily sh*g it.

Incidentally, I bet Neil Armstrong's speedy would fetch more money than any ten rollys. It's all relative.

Based on another thread, try coming home & having to explain to your other half that you've spent the entire lottery jackpot

on a watch because "IT'S BEEN TO THE F*****G MOON WOMAN!"


----------



## mjolnir

oubaas56 said:


> try coming home & having to explain to your other half that you've spent the entire lottery jackpot
> 
> on a watch because "IT'S BEEN TO THE F*****G MOON WOMAN!"


:rofl:

I'd love to see this conversation played out.


----------



## bobbymonks

thorpey69 said:


> So what about Rolls Royce??? == Patek???
> 
> Silly thread without any possible conclusive out come,i predict it being locked or moved within 5 pages :tongue2: :lol:


Yeah why not!

Rolls = PP

Bentley = AP

Maybach = VC

You get the picture. At the very high of any market and you move in those circles, quality is about equal, price isn't mentioned ( too vulgar, and irrelevant ) so you buy what you like and you want it. And that's it.

I would still say that Omega as a brand has more class & presence than Rolex, for example Aston Martin has more class that Porsche or the Italians which in turn have more class than an Evo or GTR but doesn't make them better cars, but that my opinion and like Arseh*les everybody's got one.

I agree with the above though, such an emotive topic is subjective to the reader, so there's no chance of a definitive answer


----------



## VinceR

Don't you just love threads like this! There's nothing that galvanises feelings more so .. I've owned several of each brand, still own a couple of Omega's (SMP & Speedy) but just one Rolex (ND Sub) .. both are great marques, with great history & as such both produce great watches. Their fit & finish is near enough as to make no difference, Omega's bracelets are (IMHO) nicer looking & far sturdier (although I've not played with the new Rolex one) but both perform their function more than adequately .. resale is (to me pointless), I buy a watch if I like it (and have the funds) & I could not care less if it's worth the same/more or less than when I bought it. Anyhow if/when I flip, I've had plenty of wear out of the watch & that is worth anything I may lose ..

As with all marques, they'll have the detractors & supporters .. that'll never change, you see all kinds of people wearing both Omega & Rolex & to attempt characterisation is as pointless as chocolate teapot. Enjoy what you have & let others enjoy what they have - simple really.


----------



## dickstar1977

A really interesting one this, and one I would like to add my thoughts to! I (as some of you know) only collect Omegas (although my wife wears a gorgeous IWC Edison). Today whilst shopping in Bluewater I decided to scratch a long had itch and try on a Rolex sub and at the same time compare it to a PO45mm!

Well, firstly the Rolex and the Omega are both superb watches, the Omega is heavier, chunkier and more noticable, the Rolex possibly more classic, but botha superb build and quality! What did strike me was the price, the Rolex was Â£3500 the Omega Â£2100! Fathom that!?? SO:

IMHO Rolex and Omega are both superb swiss watches, I would liken both not to BMW and Mercedes but more Porsche, something a bit but still amazing quality and will work all day everyday, a timeless classic! The Rolex Sub is like the 911, an evolution of the same thing for 40 plus years, improved and refined!

Rolex over the years have done a superb job of marketing their watches as 'exclusive' and at the same time putting huge energy in to raising the profile of their vintage watches, Omega have done the same and in recent years followed suit with their vintage models! That all said, what ever way you chose to cut this they are both still volume manufacturers and mass producers!

Which brings me to my last point! Whilst at the Omega/Rolex AD today trying on these gems I wore my Ploprof, the salesman spent the entire time in the store ogling my Omega and showing his colleagues and when I had tried them both on and put my Ploprof back on I genuinely felt like I was wearing something special!

Summary: Both Omega and Rolex are superb quality Swiss watches, but nothing makes you feel like you are wearing something special than wearing a vintage watch, where thats a Rolex or a Timex!

Cheers Tom


----------



## foztex

dickstar1977 said:


> Summary: Both Omega and Rolex are superb quality Swiss watches, but nothing makes you feel like you are wearing something special than wearing a vintage watch, where thats a Rolex or a Timex!
> 
> Cheers Tom


Hit the nail on the head there Tom I reckon,

essentially the best watch is the one you like the most. with regular (or even no) servicing a mechanical watch will last practically indefinitely. Regardless of what name it has on the dial.

Andy


----------



## mrteatime

Regal325 said:


> They've both got a long way to go to match Seiko And Seiko have a long way to go to match Alpha


now then.....*please justify that statement*.......have alpha come up with something better then the springdrive then regal?

and while your at it can you also tell us what planet your on? h34r:


----------



## BondandBigM

Check out this article, I admit it may be a bit biased but it gives a bit of interesting info on the internal mechanics of Rolex and Omega.

Who Makes the Better Movement - Rolex or Omega


----------



## TraserH3

I've always liked the Seamaster black and the Planet Ocean looks great. That said I regard the rolex much more as a usable watch in terms of diving and day to day wear. I've had limited experience with Omega wearers but i've met alot of rolex wearers offshore and they always strike me as a better watch.

I realise there is a marked difference in price but if someone wearing an omega at Â£2000 won't wear it day to day but a rolex owner will then it says alot in my book.


----------



## VinceR

TraserH3 said:


> I realise there is a marked difference in price but if someone wearing an omega at Â£2000 won't wear it day to day but a rolex owner will then it says alot in my book.


Says nothing in mine, some people prefer to baby their watches for fear of a scratch/ding or dent ..

I also scuba dive (although 40m is the deepest I go) & have taken all my divers down with me at some point. However for me I much prefer to dive with my SMP (or Superocean), than my Sub & this is simply because of ease of use & visibility ..


----------



## Croz

In 1979 i bought a Speedmaster and a friend bought a Submariner date both new, both from the same shop on the same day. (sales man must have thought it was Christmas) about a year later we swapped, (straight swap!) We are both still wearing them to this day.

Finacialy i am delighted, but deep down i regret it. I think the speedie looks and wears better, more of a relaxed feel.

Plus the Subs face as a orange/cream patina that i'm not into.

So from me only half a smile towards the Sub.


----------



## ollyhock

BondandBigM said:


> Check out this article, I admit it may be a bit biased but it gives a bit of interesting info on the internal mechanics of Rolex and Omega.
> 
> Who Makes the Better Movement - Rolex or Omega


ive had a co-axial planet ocean for three months now and can say that it is the most accurate watch i have owned to date, it keeps amazing time.

ive also never had a rolex which kept good time, they all lost never gained, so bad that i had to adjust them every fortnight.

ive not adjusted the planet ocean in three months ,granted its not exact time but its only aboit a minute out, i can live with that


----------



## ollyhock

Croz said:


> In 1979 i bought a Speedmaster and a friend bought a Submariner date both new, both from the same shop on the same day. (sales man must have thought it was Christmas) about a year later we swapped, (straight swap!) We are both still wearing them to this day.
> 
> Finacialy i am delighted, but deep down i regret it. I think the speedie looks and wears better, more of a relaxed feel.
> 
> Plus the Subs face as a orange/cream patina that i'm not into.
> 
> So from me only half a smile towards the Sub.


most vintage seiko's dials have faired better than rolex dials, get past the hype and the price tag and the omega imo is just as good a watch

only one thing worse than a fake rolex a real one


----------



## andy s

ollyhock said:


> Which watch brand do you think is best? omega or rolex.
> 
> i personally having repaired both, think that the new omega's are better although i think the co-axial escapement is of no real advantage(imo).
> 
> i like the fact that omega have gone with the trend of oversized cases , as my rolex now always looks that much smaller.
> 
> both great watches tried and tested but which is best taking into account all the factors
> 
> quality
> 
> looks
> 
> resale value
> 
> AD availability
> 
> customer care


I have three omega watches. 1950s and 60,s one is a regular wear ie every day for 20 years (1963 constelation) keeps perfect time never had a service until 2008. cal551. imho unbeatable. Here it is


----------



## ollyhock

potz said:


> Pity I can't play. I have two Rolexes presently with a further two that have been and gone but I've yet to experience an Omega, or two :wink2: Something I'm looking forward to very much.


potz youd like an omega, im just having a laugh about the rolex, ofcourse its a good watch but youd be impressed with an omega aswell.


----------



## BondandBigM

I have both a PO and a couple of Rolex, the Po is never out of the box. To be fair the PO does keep good time and goes almost the second you pick it up as opposed to my Sub and GMT which both need a couple of turns of the winder to get going. But a couple of things about the PO, it just doesn't sit on the wrist right, difficult to describe but just something about it isn't right and in the end regardless of what you think or how much you dislike Rolex it just won't hold it's value like a Sub.

When I was looking for a chrono to sort of make up my "collection" I looked a a few different makes including a Speedie and not able to get a Daytona I eventually bought a Tag Carrera which imho around that price range was the best of the bunch.

B.


----------



## ollyhock

BondandBigM said:


> I have both a PO and a couple of Rolex, the Po is never out of the box. To be fair the PO does keep good time and goes almost the second you pick it up as opposed to my Sub and GMT which both need a couple of turns of the winder to get going. But a couple of things about the PO, it just doesn't sit on the wrist right, difficult to describe but just something about it isn't right and in the end regardless of what you think or how much you dislike Rolex it just won't hold it's value like a Sub.
> 
> When I was looking for a chrono to sort of make up my "collection" I looked a a few different makes including a Speedie and not able to get a Daytona I eventually bought a Tag Carrera which imho around that price range was the best of the bunch.
> 
> B.


thats interesting you say it doesnt fit right on the wrist. i find mine ok for a 45.5mm watch its actually quite slim so it seems smaller to me.

i like the way that the saphire is level with the bezel, my sub saphire seems alkward and adds a few mm to the watch plus i like the anti glare

the thing that gets me is that the omega has the anti glare a higfhly decorated case back better presentation box and better bracelet but is 2k cheaper

side by side the omega is heavier and has more presence, it just doesnt add up to me . i find rolex like snap-on tools mighty expensive and debatable whether they are better than the rest

but undeniably good marketing


----------



## mel

Regal325 said:


> They've both got a long way to go to match Seiko And Seiko have a* long way to go to match Alpha*


Well, I'm glad it wasn't me who said that - I'm in enough trouble over jokes as it is! :grin:


----------



## langtoftlad

Apples & Oranges - can't be compared.

Both are fruit but neither is better than the other.

Both have different varieties and the price can vary too.

One can like both, either or neither.


----------



## ollyhock

langtoftlad said:


> Apples & Oranges - can't be compared.
> 
> Both are fruit but neither is better than the other.
> 
> Both have different varieties and the price can vary too.
> 
> One can like both, either or neither.


sorry but when one is 2k and the other is 4k you can tell one big difference an extortionate price


----------



## ENY55V

Both over rated and TOO expensive for what they are.


----------



## ollyhock

potz said:


> langtoftlad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apples & Oranges - can't be compared.
> 
> Both are fruit but neither is better than the other.
> 
> Both have different varieties and the price can vary too.
> 
> One can like both, either or neither.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quite right. But you get morons trying to compare Astons to Jeeps to prove a point and seeing who the threadstarter is all becomes clear. Some people have an agenda and bore the world with it even though the world couldn't give a ooh:. Maybe mummy and daddy didn't love them enough when they were little - or too much.
Click to expand...

who lit the fuse on your tampon potz.

sounds like theres some underlying issues in your camp matey


----------



## SharkBike

langtoftlad said:


> Apples & Oranges - can't be compared.
> 
> Both are fruit but neither is better than the other.
> 
> Both have different varieties and the price can vary too.
> 
> One can like both, either or neither.


...and then there's the lemon...


----------



## mach 0.0013137

SharkBike said:


> langtoftlad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apples & Oranges - can't be compared.
> 
> Both are fruit but neither is better than the other.
> 
> Both have different varieties and the price can vary too.
> 
> One can like both, either or neither.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and then there's the lemon...
Click to expand...

If only the design team had done one last check on the plans before going home :cry2:

:lol:


----------



## SharkBike

Hey, at least they were wise enough to leave off the cyclops.


----------



## mach 0.0013137

SharkBike said:


> Hey, at least they were wise enough to leave off the cyclops.


Yeah, one would look stoopid on the BM :yes:


----------



## foztex

Not really an solution, more of a thought,

Having seen this thread resurrected i mulled a while and came to the following conclusion.

There are differences between the two but once again it comes down to what you like. Now I've never had a rolex but have handled a few and for me the answer is this.

Rolexes are very samey (in a good way, they've a look), Omegas have variety. If we are talking 60's 70's era pieces it's gotta be Omega everytime for me. PloProf, SHOM, 120c, SM300, SM1000, Speedies, sonics and hummers. All outstanding quality, in-house movts and real originality. However if you want a modern piece the Omegas for me don't cut it, even with co-axial (I'd rather Sinn Diapal for innovation), a modern Rolex is just as good as a classic and where a lovely aged tritium no date sub or dweller would be just peachy, a modern sports Rolex is every bit as good looking and well built.

However for me if I was buying a modern piece, I'd get an Anonimo 

cheers

Andy


----------



## bigpipe

Has anyone have information on the dosage amount that should be given to a 10 yr old chld for adhd? I have read studies that say taking omega 3 have improved hyoerness and concentration. Anyone tried this method for themselves or their child? Thanks


----------



## Parabola

In reality, there is no difference in quality, there both poor substitutes to telling the time compared to say a Â£100 quartz. As we all know by its nothing to do with quality why we have favourites it's because *we* are all different...

Oh and bigpipe piss off


----------



## Haggis

Parabola said:


> In reality, there is no difference in quality, there both poor substitutes to telling the time compared to say a Â£100 quartz. As we all know by its nothing to do with quality why we have favourites it's because *we* are all different...
> 
> Oh and bigpipe piss off
> 
> Well this is interesting as in which watch? For the last few years I have debated buying one or the other. The problem I have is they are both taken for fakes when anyone sees them. And there time keeping is nothing compaired to a Casio at Â£50. So why buy a watch that is after all some kind of extension to there man hood. The resale value for both is not very good, yesterday I noticed an Omega Quartz recent model in a second hand Jewellers for Â£575 in the box. Original price Â£1200. NOT a good buy after all.
> 
> You could buy a set of bagpipes for that kind of money.


----------



## Livius de Balzac

potz said:


> I think the lemon is a great alternative to the other two fruits. :tongue2:
> 
> And would introducing Breitlings into the equation be akin to throwing some limes into the shopping basket?


I tried a Rolex Datejust at my AD a couple a years ago, very nice watch, but my Breitling felt like a much more expensive watch! Case and dial on Rolex and Breitling are similar in quality, but the Breitling Navitimer bracelet is much better and more comfortable.


----------



## cobweb

A totally fruitless and pointless thread that only starts arguements...both tell the time..some will prefer the subtle understated call of a lovely vintage Omega and some will prefer the whole chavosity that is the nasty Rolex divers watch thingy.

As anyone can read I have a completely unbiased opinion and therfore I should be listened to :tongue2:

PS It's not a matter of life and death, it's much more important than that - that was Bill Shankly


----------



## BondandBigM

cobweb said:


> A totally fruitless thread


How can you say that, we've had apples, oranges, lemons and limes so far :lol:


----------



## ollyhock

mach 0.0013137 said:


> SharkBike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> langtoftlad said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apples & Oranges - can't be compared.
> 
> Both are fruit but neither is better than the other.
> 
> Both have different varieties and the price can vary too.
> 
> One can like both, either or neither.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and then there's the lemon...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If only the design team had done one last check on the plans before going home :cry2:
> 
> :lol:
Click to expand...

i really like the dial


----------



## Livius de Balzac

Thoughts and "facts" about Rolex and ETA movements. Rolex vs Omega vs Breitling.

Rolexmovements are inhouse, but not very refined in a horological perspective, robust, reliable, overdimentioned, but with a good escapement. This mean high accuracy and a long working life.

The most robust of the ETA movements are the 2801 and 2824. The ETA 2892 is the best compromise between robustness, reliability, size, accuracy and productioncosts, and the most used swiss mechanical movement. In chronometergrade, the 2892 is a very good movement!

Both Rolex and ETA movements are massproduced on assembly lines and the highend ETA movements cost about the same to produce as similar Rolex movements.

After ten years I still doesn't see the point with the Omega co-axial movements. Most Omega movements are completely made by ETA, including the cal 2500 co-axial and the Lemania chronograph movements. The cal 8500 and the tourbillonmovements are assembled/finished by Omega with most of the parts made by ETA. The co-axial movements are not bad movements, but they aren't better than similar ETA movements, just different.

Breitling doesn't use movements from ETA, but use unfinished and unasembled ETA ebauches. The ebauches are finished, decorated and assembled at Breitling Chronometrie (former Kelek) in La Chaux-de-Fonds, to a very high standard and all movements are chronometerceritfied. The chronograph modules used by Breitling are made inhouse and now they also have an inhouse movement. The ETA based Breitling movements aren't necessarily better than chronometergrade ETA movements, but have better quality control and a better finish, plus aditional functions with the modules.

Who make the best watch, Rolex, Omega or Breitling?

All three brands have a long and rich history and they make high quality, massproduced watches. Rolex about 1000000 watches a year, Omega about 500000 and Breitling about 200000.

Cases and dials are of similar quality, Rolex use a more expensive stainless steel, but Breitling have the best bracelets and Omega has James Bond.

Rolex is owned by a trust, The Wilsdorf fundation.

Omega is owned by the worlds largest watch corperation, The Swatch Group.

Breitling is family owned, by Ernest and Theodore Schneider.

Just as the companies are different, the watches are also different.

The best watch is the one you like best, the watch that speaks to you, the watch you still have a great pleasure to use ten years after you bought it.


----------



## cobweb

BondandBigM said:


> cobweb said:
> 
> 
> 
> A totally fruitless thread
> 
> 
> 
> How can you say that, we've had apples, oranges, lemons and limes so far :lol:
Click to expand...

Emm...that was the joke...maybe I should have put in a smiley :huh: Not too worry it really wasn't a peach of a joke.


----------



## gallch

ok - here we go into the lion's den

The trouble with a thread like this is that the question as asked looks for a comparison between two _brands _- and much as the marketing folk would like us to think it otherwise, there's *nothing there *except a bunch of associations in our heads. Rolex the brand doesn't exist, neither does Omega - they are just image, puffs of insubstantial smoke that make us think it is ok to spend lots of money on their products. And what we do think is created by adverts, other people, what we have heard, threads like this. The marketing people LOVE threads like this. That's why they send trolls in from time to time to start them...

Now, if the question was let's compare Rolex and Swatch Group as companies that could make sense. Or we could compare two of their vaguely similar products - and I did once read a very useful comparison of a watch from each of the Seamaster and Submariner ranges. That would make sense. Even comparing apples and oranges would make sense.

Comparing "Rolex" and "Omega" is just marketing steam.


----------



## Haggis

gallch said:


> ok - here we go into the lion's den
> 
> The trouble with a thread like this is that the question as asked looks for a comparison between two _brands _- and much as the marketing folk would like us to think it otherwise, there's *nothing there *except a bunch of associations in our heads. Rolex the brand doesn't exist, neither does Omega - they are just image, puffs of insubstantial smoke that make us think it is ok to spend lots of money on their products. And what we do think is created by adverts, other people, what we have heard, threads like this. The marketing people LOVE threads like this. That's why they send trolls in from time to time to start them...
> 
> Now, if the question was let's compare Rolex and Swatch Group as companies that could make sense. Or we could compare two of their vaguely similar products - and I did once read a very useful comparison of a watch from each of the Seamaster and Submariner ranges. That would make sense. Even comparing apples and oranges would make sense.
> 
> Comparing "Rolex" and "Omega" is just marketing steam.


Well said, this is a very poor thread, not interesting and at the end of the day very boring. Elitist twaddle. The only thing to compare Rolex and Omega with is Timex. Buy one and folk laugh. :tongue2: :blink:


----------



## ESL

I have owned watches from both, and many other brands into the bargain, and quite frankly my Nokia N95 keeps better time than any of them.

And I have had more people asking about my phone than ANY watch I have ever worn!

What a bol***ks thread.

Would someone please put it out of it's misery?


----------



## BondandBigM

ESL said:


> I have owned watches from both, and many other brands into the bargain, and quite frankly my Nokia N95 keeps better time than any of them.


It won't last as long though, I've got an N95 lying in the drawer that packed up in less than a year and you can't go swimming with a Nokia either.

:lol: :lol:


----------



## ESL

BondandBigM said:


> ESL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have owned watches from both, and many other brands into the bargain, and quite frankly my Nokia N95 keeps better time than any of them.
> 
> 
> 
> It won't last as long though, I've got an N95 lying in the drawer that packed up in less than year and you can't go swimming with a Nokia either.
> 
> :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...

No one seems to go swimming in their Omegas or Rolexes either come to that - too busy posing by the pool in the hope that someone might notice the buggers to risk getting them wet...


----------



## BondandBigM

ESL said:


> BondandBigM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have owned watches from both, and many other brands into the bargain, and quite frankly my Nokia N95 keeps better time than any of them.
> 
> 
> 
> It won't last as long though, I've got an N95 lying in the drawer that packed up in less than year and you can't go swimming with a Nokia either.
> 
> :lol: :lol:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one seems to go swimming in their Omegas or Rolexes either come to that - too busy posing by the pool in the hope that someone might notice the buggers to risk getting them wet...
Click to expand...

Fortunately I'm not one of those posers, I get in the shower everyday with mine

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The Rolex that is and not the Nokia

:lol: :lol:


----------



## ollyhock

i just think rolex need to be this big now, the big watch trend has made rolex seem too small imo


----------



## ollyhock

potz said:


> ESL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BondandBigM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ESL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have owned watches from both, and many other brands into the bargain, and quite frankly my Nokia N95 keeps better time than any of them.
> 
> 
> 
> It won't last as long though, I've got an N95 lying in the drawer that packed up in less than year and you can't go swimming with a Nokia either.
> 
> :lol: :lol:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one seems to go swimming in their Omegas or Rolexes either come to that - too busy posing by the pool in the hope that someone might notice the buggers to risk getting them wet...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My S-D goes swimming/diving where ever I do: oceans, lakes, rivers, gravel pits and very rarely in swimming pools (simply because I prefer proper water to the smelly brew of piss and chlorine). And so do my other properly waterproof watches, ie. >=20 atm. Even my vintage 5513 has been for a swim in the river :tongue2:
Click to expand...











this goes down to 2000m, but more people have been on the moon than have gone to depths deeper than 250m and survived


----------



## BondandBigM

ollyhock said:


> i just think rolex need to be this big now, the big watch trend has made rolex seem too small imo


 :lol:


----------



## BondandBigM

potz said:


> BondandBigM said:
> 
> 
> 
> :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :drool:
> 
> Tried one on recently. Perfect fit. And second-hand prices are also beginning to come down.
Click to expand...

Makes a PO look like a Timex in comparison :lol: :lol:


----------



## MarkF

Ok, been drinking.......but surely, considering the array of perfectly adequate horological items in the market place, a Rolex or an Omega (aka swatch) is an aspirational purchase? :huh: And....surely you buy the Omega because you can't or don't want to stretch to the Rolex? I don't have either but I am pretty sure that most Omega owners would happily toss their pride and joy in the wheelle bin if a Rolex was offered as a replacement.

Yep, the marketing man won, but what price does feeling good carry?

What's best, a Ferrari or a Lamborghini (aka Audi)?


----------



## ollyhock

MarkF said:


> Ok, been drinking.......but surely, considering the array of perfectly adequate horological items in the market place, a Rolex or an Omega (aka swatch) is an aspirational purchase? :huh: And....surely you buy the Omega because you can't or don't want to stretch to the Rolex? I don't have either but I am pretty sure that most Omega owners would happily toss their pride and joy in the wheelle bin if a Rolex was offered as a replacement.
> 
> Yep, the marketing man won, but what price does feeling good carry?
> 
> What's best, a Ferrari or a Lamborghini (aka Audi)?


wrong i think the omega p o is better than the sub personally so i wouldnt swap

people buy omega because they havnt been brainwashed and had their pants taken down by rolex


----------



## BondandBigM

ollyhock said:


> people buy omega because they havnt been brainwashed and had their pants taken down by rolex


My pants are firmly up and around my arse.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Till Big M tries to interfere with me later

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

If I'm lucky that is

:lol: :lol:


----------



## MarkF

ollyhock said:


> wrong i think the omega p o is better than the sub personally so i wouldnt swap


Don't believe you


----------



## ollyhock

MarkF said:


> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> wrong i think the omega p o is better than the sub personally so i wouldnt swap
> 
> 
> 
> Don't believe you
Click to expand...

matey i have both, the sub was my dads he left me it and other thansentimental value i think its ****, it keeps crap time as have all the other rolexes ive had

it now seems way to small compared to the modern watches and the bracelet is a joke for a watch of this supposed quality

beleive me im not saying omega is everything but imo its better than rolex

i have a ulysse maxi marine which is far better than the two


----------



## BondandBigM

ollyhock said:


> MarkF said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> wrong i think the omega p o is better than the sub personally so i wouldnt swap
> 
> 
> 
> Don't believe you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> matey i have both, the sub was my dads he left me it and other thansentimental value i think its ****, it keeps crap time
Click to expand...

Are you sure it's real ???

As said I also have both and the timekeeping of my LV is no worse than my PO


----------



## ollyhock

potz said:


> Some people give their watch a service and a clean once the time keeping starts going off. But that would be the same ones who don't blame the whole car brand when theirs breaks down due to neglect.
> 
> "Never try to argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and once there will beat you with experience."


that statement/gag is ancient i read that lolly stick too about 5 years ago

you like rolex great i like other brands great

end of


----------



## mel

Cue Music , Lights, Camera, Action! :band:

"We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when, but I know we'll meet again some sunny day" h34r:

{OH and P that is! :grin: )

Maybe I shouldn't stir it up - - Ooooh, go on then, I will, 'cos I'm a stirrer (but most folks love me for it) :lol:


----------



## BondandBigM

mel said:


> Cue Music , Lights, Camera, Action! :band:
> 
> "We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when, but I know we'll meet again some sunny day" h34r:
> 
> {OH and P that is! :grin: )
> 
> Maybe I shouldn't stir it up - - Ooooh, go on then, I will, 'cos I'm a stirrer (but most folks love me for it) :lol:


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Mutley

ollyhock said:


> potz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some people give their watch a service and a clean once the time keeping starts going off. But that would be the same ones who don't blame the whole car brand when theirs breaks down due to neglect.
> 
> "Never try to argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and once there will beat you with experience."
> 
> 
> 
> that statement/gag is ancient i read that lolly stick too about 5 years ago
> 
> you like rolex great i like other brands great
> 
> end of
Click to expand...

I think most people here appreciate both brands & that the OP is a bit of a k**b for posting such rubbish in the first place


----------



## jasonm

Couldnt agree more Mutley


----------



## pugster

each to there own  ,personally i dont think rolex approach anywhere near the prices they command ,that being said you can also buy a cheap seiko that does the same job as an omega -so i guess any watch pricing is irrevelant, you are just buying into marketing in all of them.

would i trade any of the omegas ive owned for a rolex or buy one if i could afford it ? personally no, there few rolex i actually like tbh and theres better brands out there imo if i wanted to spend that kind of money on a single watch .


----------



## MarkF

I still think that, for most people, they are an aspirational purchase, "best" doesn't come into it, precieved "best" does. How many people have (or want) to trade from a Omega to Rolex? How many people have traded "up" from a Rolex to an Omega? :huh:

Stinking hangover


----------



## PhilM

MarkF said:


> Stinking hangover


But it bet it was worth it 

As for this thread, it seems to have turned into one of those my watch is better that your watch.... well to me both of these brands have stood the test of time and evolved to survive, both have long histories of producing fine watches that are either fit for purpose (like the Sub, PP etc ......a long list of tool watches, or like the Air King, Constellation etc... again a long list of more dress like watches)

So each to their own, in fact I own both brands and wouldn't be happy with owning only Omega or Rolex..


----------



## gallch

PhilM said:


> MarkF said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stinking hangover
> 
> 
> 
> But it bet it was worth it
> 
> As for this thread, it seems to have turned into one of those my watch is better that your watch.... well to me both of these brands have stood the test of time and evolved to survive, both have long histories of producing fine watches that are either fit for purpose (like the Sub, PP etc ......a long list of tool watches, or like the Air King, Constellation etc... again a long list of more dress like watches)
> 
> So each to their own, in fact I own both brands and wouldn't be happy with owning only Omega or Rolex..
Click to expand...

I am so fed up with this thread I can't believe I am even posting this one -

But look at what you are saying - you are talking about the brand: "both have long histories of producing fine watches"....."I own both brands"....

The brand produces *nothing*, you own *watches* not brands.

I know you will say I am splitting hairs, but this is how the marketing thing works. Think about it - the Omega watch I own was manufactured in 1960 so it may or may not have any characteristics in common with the Planet Ocean I would like to own. Logically, the answer is no, it won't, not least because of the fact that Omega the brand is owned by Swatch Group now and it wasn't in 1960 ( not saying that's a good or a bad thing, just a fact ). Rolex watches on the other hand are made by an outfit that has not changed substantially in decades ( ever? )in terms of its corporate ownership structure.

That may or may not have an effect on the watches' characteristics.

But the marketing people want you to pick up on all those decades of brand associations and draw conclusions from them.

Which is what this whole thread is shot through with.

*sigh* another example from outside the watch world. Mercedes Benz cars have a brand that is well-known for producing lots of resonances about quality. Fact - Mercedes Benz cars' _actual _reliability has varied over time according to all sorts of factors around design and production techniques. The public perception of MB cars as reliable has not altered anything like so much.

Same with watches. Rolex watches brand resonances are distinct from the actual watches. Example - Rolex are the official timekeepers at Wimbledon this year as they have been for many years. They have their logo all over the courts. And of course their famous clocks. Now, let's see - how many of the clocks use a movement even remotely related to any of the wrist-watches they sell on the back of the brand association ? and yes, I do own a Rolex so I'm not just carping.

I just like this forum because it is mostly about actual technical and design stuff and not about how much we were manipulated last week by the marketing gurus.

Sorry - I'll go and get another coffee.


----------



## PhilM

Coffee... I think you need something with less stimulants, might I suggest a nice cup of chamomile tea


----------



## gallch

PhilM said:


> Coffee... I think you need something with less stimulants, might I suggest a nice cup of chamomile tea


oh dear - that was a bit of a rant wasn't it ? I'm back in my box now...


----------



## ESL

I don't buy "brands" - I buy watches.

Much more satisfying.


----------



## PhilM

George you've never met me then


----------



## gallch

PhilM said:


> George you've never met me then


No, but, you see, this is my point - the T-shirt is funny I grant you, and the hat says what it says, but the pocket-book - wtf !?! What in God's name is there in Rolex's watch-making credentials that says they'd be any good at making wallets ? Which was almost certainly made by someone else anyhow.


----------



## PhilM

TBH with the wallet I'm not actually sure if you can buy them, it's more of a corporate gift that they tend to give away... however they undoubtedly do end up being sold in the end through sites like ebay


----------



## gallch

PhilM said:


> TBH with the wallet I'm not actually sure if you can buy them, it's more of a corporate gift that they tend to give away... however they undoubtedly do end up being sold in the end through sites like ebay


Well ok - but you know that takes us off into a whole other arena. So the transaction is: they give me a wallet for free, I use it and give them advertising exposure in return.

Cap'n Bob Maxwell's daughter used to run a corporate gifts business which says it all for me.


----------



## BondandBigM

gallch said:


> PhilM said:
> 
> 
> 
> TBH with the wallet I'm not actually sure if you can buy them, it's more of a corporate gift that they tend to give away... however they undoubtedly do end up being sold in the end through sites like ebay
> 
> 
> 
> Well ok - but you know that takes us off into a whole other arena. So the transaction is: they give me a wallet for free, I use it and give them advertising exposure in return.
> 
> Cap'n Bob Maxwell's daughter used to run a corporate gifts business which says it all for me.
Click to expand...

Can't see what the problem is with that, it's the way of the corporate world, Omega and Rolex are sponsors of all sorts of events around the world and it's part of their advertising. No different from hundreds of other companies.


----------



## DMP

anyway, an empty Rolex wallet is kinda appropriate as it accurately demonstrates the state of your finances after you've forked out the necessaries for one of their watches...:lol:


----------



## Nalu

ollyhock said:


> this goes down to 2000m, but more people have been on the moon than have gone to depths deeper than 250m and survived


Not true.


----------



## ESL

PhilM said:


> George you've never met me then


To be honest Phil, if that's you in the tee-shirt then I'm happy to be a convert.

h34r:


----------



## ollyhock

Nalu said:


> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> this goes down to 2000m, but more people have been on the moon than have gone to depths deeper than 250m and survived
> 
> 
> 
> Not true.
Click to expand...

true i read it on the internet :tongue2:


----------



## JoT

ollyhock said:


> Nalu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> this goes down to 2000m, but more people have been on the moon than have gone to depths deeper than 250m and survived
> 
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> true i read it on the internet :tongue2:
Click to expand...

Well how can an expert diver like Nalu to argue with such a reference? Did you also read on the Internet that Rolex are overpriced rubbish? Wait .... don't tell me


----------



## ollyhock

JoT said:


> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nalu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> this goes down to 2000m, but more people have been on the moon than have gone to depths deeper than 250m and survived
> 
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> true i read it on the internet :tongue2:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well how can an expert diver like Nalu to argue with such a reference? Did you also read on the Internet that Rolex are overpriced rubbish? Wait .... don't tell me
Click to expand...

you dont need the internet to come to that conclusion :tongue2:


----------



## SharkBike

:swoon2:


----------



## ollyhock

JoT said:


> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nalu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ollyhock said:
> 
> 
> 
> this goes down to 2000m, but more people have been on the moon than have gone to depths deeper than 250m and survived
> 
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> true i read it on the internet :tongue2:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well how can an expert diver like Nalu to argue with such a reference? Did you also read on the Internet that Rolex are overpriced rubbish? Wait .... don't tell me
Click to expand...

cant you close this thread now its boring as hell, theres no winners here.

sorry for starting it, ill stick to the important things next time


----------



## JoT

Close it? No.

You have dug yourself a hole it's your problem!


----------



## BondandBigM

JoT said:


> Close it? No.
> 
> You have dug yourself a hole it's your problem!


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ollyhock

JoT said:


> Close it? No.
> 
> You have dug yourself a hole it's your problem!


i love rolex me!


----------



## Nalu

Well, for the other folks who might be interested in facts: seven Apollo moon missions = 14 men on the moon, versus hundreds of saturation divers and research divers. From the *U.S. Navy Diving Manual* Volume 1 (Air Diving) _NAVSEA 0994-LP-001-9110, Revision #2. 15 December 1988_

_Open-Sea Deep Diving Records_

Diving records have been set and broken with increasing regularity in the past 70 years. In 1915 the 300-fsw mark was exceeded when three U.S. Navy divers, F. Crilley, W. E. Loughman, and E. C. Nielson, reached 304 fsw using the Mk V dress. In 1972 the Mk 2 Mod 0 DDS set the in-water record of' 1,010 fsw which was subsequently broken in 1975 when divers using the Mk 1 Deep Dive System descended to 1,148 fsw. A French dive team subsequently broke the open-sea record in 1977 with a depth of 1,643 fsw.

Currently, the saturation diving record is 701m, set in 1992 by a COMEX diver.


----------



## BondandBigM

The balance is further swayed in favour of the divers as only 12 men allegedly actually landed on the moon. Apollo 13 never made it.

Apollo 11 [July 20, 1969]:

[1] Neil Armstrong "One small step for (a) man, One giant leap for mankind..."

[2] Buzz Aldrin

Apollo 12 [November 19-20, 1969]:

[3] Pete Conrad

[4] Alan Bean

Apollo 13 is famous for not getting there and the heroic efforts needed to save the crew.

Apollo 14 [February 5-6, 1971]:

[5] Alan Shepard

[6] Edgar Mitchell

Apollo 15 [July 31-August 2, 1971]:

[7] David Scott

[8] James Irwin

Apollo 16 [April 21-23, 1972]:

[9] John W. Young

[10] Charles Duke

Apollo 17 [December 11-14, 1972]:

[11] Eugene Cernan

[12] Harrison Schmitt

Source(s):

wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_times_have_m

And with the odd Rolex thrown in as well :lol: :lol:

http://rolexblog.blogspot.com/rolex-moon-watches-apollo-xiii


----------



## Nalu

Bond is right of course! I came back to this thread this AM because late last night after I logged off I realised why the number 14 wasn't sitting right with me







And here's me, just having read the latest Omega Lifetime and probably having watch "Apollo 13" a hundred times :lol:


----------



## BondandBigM

Nalu said:


> Bond is right of course! I came back to this thread this AM because late last night after I logged off I realised why the number 14 wasn't sitting right with me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here's me, just having read the latest Omega Lifetime and probably having watch "Apollo 13" a hundred times :lol:


To be fair I had literally just sat and watched about 4 hours of it on the tv including the original moon landing on the "Sky At Night"

And then read this so it might be debatable that anybody was on the moon

:lol: :lol:


----------



## William_Wilson

BondandBigM said:


> And then read this so it might be debatable that anybody was on the moon
> 
> :lol: :lol:


That link is a real hoot. :lol: If there are any viable points being made, they are are lost in that morass of idiocy. :lol:

Later,

William


----------



## crsj

My first post!!!!!

I'm new to the watch game and up until I started looking at this site, always wanted a Sea Dweller. Not so sure I'd buy one now if I had the chance for 3 reasons.

1. Discovered there are better looking watches out there.

2. No one would belive it wasn't a fake.

3. I love my Seiko Diver!!!

Who cares which one is best if you can buy a Seiko for a fraction, which no one disputes is real and everyone loves the look of it!!!

This sites a great read by the way.........


----------



## mel

Actually - - there *are* reckoned to be fake Seiko's out there h34r:

Never mind, welcome to :rltb: Keep posting, you *will* enjoy it!


----------



## Haggis

crsj said:


> My first post!!!!!
> 
> I'm new to the watch game and up until I started looking at this site, always wanted a Sea Dweller. Not so sure I'd buy one now if I had the chance for 3 reasons.
> 
> 1. Discovered there are better looking watches out there.
> 
> 2. No one would belive it wasn't a fake.
> 
> 3. I love my Seiko Diver!!!
> 
> Who cares which one is best if you can buy a Seiko for a fraction, which no one disputes is real and everyone loves the look of it!!!
> 
> This sites a great read by the way.........


BRILLANT WELL SAID, ME TOOOOOOOOOOOOO!


----------



## BondandBigM

crsj said:


> Who cares which one is best if you can buy a *Seiko* for a fraction, which no one disputes is real and everyone loves the look of it!!!


If it was as simple as that ever body would be wearing a Seiko

I personally don't own one though

:lol: :lol:


----------



## JoT

crsj said:


> My first post!!!!!
> 
> I'm new to the watch game and up until I started looking at this site, always wanted a Sea Dweller. Not so sure I'd buy one now if I had the chance for 3 reasons.
> 
> 1. Discovered there are better looking watches out there.
> 
> 2. No one would belive it wasn't a fake.
> 
> 3. I love my Seiko Diver!!!
> 
> Who cares which one is best if you can buy a Seiko for a fraction, which no one disputes is real and everyone loves the look of it!!!
> 
> This sites a great read by the way.........


As you are new I will take it easy 

1. You can probably find better looking watches than a Sea Dweller ..... but as we all know looks aren't everything.

2. Who cares? You would know it is genuine.

3. I like Seikos too but they sure as hell won't substitute for my Sea Dweller!


----------



## imitation

ollyhock said:


> Which watch brand do you think is best? omega or rolex.
> 
> i personally having repaired both, think that the new omega's are better although i think the co-axial escapement is of no real advantage(imo).
> 
> i like the fact that omega have gone with the trend of oversized cases , as my rolex now always looks that much smaller.
> 
> both great watches tried and tested but which is best taking into account all the factors
> 
> quality
> 
> looks
> 
> resale value
> 
> AD availability
> 
> customer care


Omega&Rolex, it's hard to choose, actually all very good, I like Vacheron Constantin.


----------



## mrteatime

i think the thing is.....nobody cares to be honest....you wear what you like, and thats pretty much it aint it?

its a personal thing, and a perception thing too........people get to wound up about it, when really it doesn't matter, its just there own ignorance about whats more important....

an example.........toshi and jot (im sure theres others to) both have some pretty awesome pieces.....john has a sd, omega and a seiko, and rich has some seriously cool top end pieces AND seikos.......so has philm and im sure countless others on here......

so, who cares really?


----------



## bobbymonks

> Omega&Rolex, it's hard to choose, actually all very good, I like Vacheron Constantin.


There starts another discussion

Vacheron Constantin or Audemars Piguet or Patek Philippe

Luckily I have one of each & a rolex & Omega

My method is buy one of everything, then avoid these type of issues


----------



## Stinch

> My method is buy one of everything, then avoid these type of issues


Hells Bells! This watch lark is going to cost me a fortune!! :huh:


----------



## bobbymonks

Stinch said:


> My method is buy one of everything, then avoid these type of issues
> 
> Hells Bells! This watch lark is going to cost me a fortune!! :huh:


Yep

Welcome to the world of swiss Watches!

Asset rich, and very cash poor


----------



## Chukas

Buy what you can afford and what you enjoy


----------

