rolex submariner vs omega seamaster limited edition (james bond)

[essawi]

i will buy one of them
which u guys suggest for me?
which is more luxury and better
the seamaster limited




or

the submariner

[RODJER007]

both are great watches for me the atention to detail in the finished product puts the omega a mile in front.
first the clasp both are extendable folding clasps but where the omega has a solid piece of metal that has been beutifully krafted and enginered to house the spring loaded release mechanism and give a solid feel that it does.
And the rolex oh deer it would appear that they chose to bend some tin to the shape of a clasp.

the other big notiseable difference is the case back on the omega a mesmerising laser engraved work of art.

the rolex PLAIN,BLANK, NOTHING

[gaopa]

While I am crazy about Omega watches, I would go for the Rolex Submariner. The Sub is a Rolex classic and in a different league, I think, than the Bond. Just my view. Cheers, Bill P.

[M4tt]

And yet somehow the Rolex Submariner has been in continuous production since 1954 (oops).

Both are fine watches which will give a lifetime of pleasure. No doubt you will hear a wide range of advice but ultimately you need to try them both on.

The new Rolexes have a massively improved clasp while the earlier clast was a perfectly satisfactory solution. I have an original Rolex clasp from 1963 and it is in perfect working order. I have an eleven year old Seamaster and have had to replace the bracelet once already. It is a great bracelet but with enthusiastic use it is worn out in a decade or so. The head of the watch is an entirely different matter. Mine has a new bezel and, on a strap, can be mistaken from new, from a few feet.

My only other comment is that you may wish to consider buying the standard edition. Bond currently wears a Planet Ocean and I suspect that the OO7 theme may well feel less attractive in years to come while the new standard will remain a refreshing twist on a modern classic.

For me the most important thing is the movement. While there is a lot of discussion on this, my opinion is that the 2500 with the unique Daniels' Coaxial Escapement is a better movement by virtue of that fabulous escapement. However, the 3135 is also a fine movement that looks great and performs brilliantly.

Ultimately they are both great watches. Personally I prefer the blue Bond and suspect that this will be the one people remember. However the Sub is an iconic watch. Choose the one which speaks loudest to you. you simply cannot lose!

Me, I own the blue Bond in quartz and this fills the space a Sub would take. I wouldn't swap it for a Sub. (Well I would, but then I'd sell it and buy a new Bond!)

[Anthony]

Submariner hands down.

[vbuskirk]

I wouldn't consider anything marred by advertising for a movie as a true luxury item.

[23fengshui]

Between those two? Anthony is right; Sub hands down. Espcially if money is no object.

[dkpw]

both are great watches for me the atention to detail in the finished product puts the omega a mile in front.
first the clasp both are extendible folding clasps but where the omega has a solid piece of metal that has been beautifully crafted and engineered to house the spring loaded release mechanism and give a solid feel that it does.
And the rolex oh deer it would appear that they chose to bend some tin to the shape of a clasp.

the other big noticeable difference is the case back on the omega a mesmerising laser engraved work of art.

the rolex PLAIN,BLANK, NOTHING

I'm new here and a Rolex Sub owner, so bear that in mind when considering my reply.

True the Rolex case back is plain and not engraved. Some say that a case back engraving helps retain the watch in position on the wrist. I'm not sure if there is that much of a difference in the real world. I can tell you that I do not remember the time that I last looked at the back of my watch. I'm sure if you did pick the SMP you would probably go for months without looking at the case back, once the novelty of your purchase has evaporated.

The Sub has been in production since 1953, and features a robust and tested 3135 calibre, COSC certified at -4/+6 secs per day. Mine averages about 1.8 seconds fast a day.

Like the calibre, the clasp is tried and tested. It has been seen as a weak point by some, appearing tinny compared to the rest of the watch. All I can say is it that I find it to be secure and comfortable. The bracelet is easy to adjust, not only with the comfort micro-adjustments, but I can add or remove links in a minute or two with nothing more complicated than a jeweller's screwdriver.

The SMP LE does look great, I personally do not care for the 007 branding but it is popular and may add some resale value to the watch. Generally speaking Rolexes command a higher resale value.

Good luck on your choice.

[Texcowboy9]

I traded my Omeaga Seamaster Pro (2254.50) and my Omega Seamaster GMT (Great White) for a Rolex Submariner. I am perfectly happy with the trade. I recently had a chance to buy another Great White at a real good price but decided not to as I wear my Submariner every day and did not want to have the GMT just to have it sit in the watch box.

With that said, the 2254.50 and the Great White are very nice watches, I just personally prefer the Sub.

[Gray C]

I prefer the Omega.

As a well respected watch repairer once said to me "With a Rolex you are getting half as good a watch for twice the money"

OK, I would not go that far! . In my opinion, in the Rolex, you are getting an equal quality watch at twice the money