Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner? - Page 19
Like Tree321Likes

Thread: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

Page 19 of 28 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 275
  1. #181
    Member ItnStln's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    764

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by TSC View Post
    The correct line here would have been I wonder how many people would still have gone with the PO, if James Bond has still worn the Sub?
    To underestimate the pull of that watch because of the Bond connection would be foolish. I think that's more to do with it than the price. Omega owe Bond a hell of a lot. But on a side note, my PO is far more accurate than 3 of my friend's Rolex. Not wildly, but enough for me to think that the Omega movements may edge it on some of the models.
    I'm not going to lie, seeing the Omega Seamaster that Pierce Brosnan wore in GoldenEye is what got me interested in Omega. When I got my Seamaster 2220.80, it wasn't because it was a Bond watch, it was because I liked the watch.

  2. #182
    Member 007_Omega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    101

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by TSC View Post
    The correct line here would have been I wonder how many people would still have gone with the PO, if James Bond has still worn the Sub?
    To underestimate the pull of that watch because of the Bond connection would be foolish. I think that's more to do with it than the price. Omega owe Bond a hell of a lot. But on a side note, my PO is far more accurate than 3 of my friend's Rolex. Not wildly, but enough for me to think that the Omega movements may edge it on some of the models.
    Well, Bond never wore the 8900 but I see your point. Hell, Bond drew me to Omega from a young age as the modern Bonds have all worn it (well, my parents/grandparents both wore/wear Omegas as well).

    This may be controversial but would a 2017 James Bond wear a Sub? The Sub of the 60s and the image it brought with it is not the same one it carries today. Back then, it was considered a big watch and it was breaking the mold of the traditional dress watch. It was a classy diver and a maverick. It's something I'd imagine James Bond of the 60s wearing and obviously he wore. Who knows?
    James Bond walks into a watch store...

  3. #183
    TSC
    TSC is online now
    Member TSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    2,156

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Fair points gents, but many would not have been made aware of the PO had it not been for Bond, that's more what I meant. Probably didn't word it as well as I could have... but I'm not saying people buy it JUST because Bond wore it, Of course, you have to like it too. That's a given.

  4. #184
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    157

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by 007_Omega View Post
    The 8500/8900 are products of its times and I seriously doubt they will be classics or timeless. They are just too polarizing because of the size. I've tried those watches on and can't imagine how anyone with a small wrist (I'm 6.5) could ever think it looks good but I've seen the watch on someone with huge wrists/hands and it felt right at home. The 2500, while still bigger than the Sub and lacking the in-house movement of the new models, could end up a classic. It's a watch I was seriously considering and one I still may pick up in the future.

    I think a good argument would be for the SMP Master Co-Axial. I know a lot of people who love that watch, even Rolex fans. Obviously, even that watch will have its critics because some people can't stand the "fake vintage" look.
    The watches in a line that become classics are usually the ones that represent the essence of the watch, and I believe in the case of the PO that will always be the 42mm 2500. Omega has in subsequent models "blinged" out the watch to a startling extent; applied 12/6/9, glossy dial, colored text, and that's not to mention all the variations which generally even blingier. Will the original PO become a classic? It's already a modern classic by reputation, and the 2201.50/2900.50 are already starting to climb back up in price.

    That's what happened with the SMP300...the Peter Blake, which is probably the "purest" of the line, has become a classic. I'm betting some of the more distilled Bond variants will as well over time.

    I personally don't think the SMP300M will ever reach that threshold, but who knows. It's a gorgeous watch, but it's a dress watch, not a tool watch. It's also essentially an homage watch, not an evolution of a lineage or a new form. But who knows, it might end up being the classic to end all classics...
    Last edited by Suijin; July 8th, 2017 at 22:21.
    Vlciudoli and Galaga like this.

  5. #185
    Member Zavato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hudson Valley
    Posts
    1,126

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    I owned a PO, now have a Sub C. I find the Sub C more comfortable to wear. The PO felt top heavy. My Sub C runs +2 sec/day. The PO was not better. Both are great and it's a matter of preference.

    -Z-

  6. #186
    Member Super Fuzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    202

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by Suijin View Post
    The watches in a line that become classics are usually the ones that represent the essence of the watch, and I believe in the case of the PO that will always be the 42mm 2500. Omega has in subsequent models "blinged" out the watch to a startling extent; applied 12/6/9, glossy dial, colored text, and that's not to mention all the variations which generally even blingier. Will the original PO become a classic? It's already a modern classic by reputation, and the 2201.50/2900.50 are already starting to climb back up in price.

    That's what happened with the SMP300...the Peter Blake, which is probably the "purest" of the line, has become a classic. I'm betting some of the more distilled Bond variants will as well over time.

    I personally don't think the SMP300M will ever reach that threshold, but who knows. It's a gorgeous watch, but it's a dress watch, not a tool watch. It's also essentially an homage watch, not an evolution of a lineage or a new form. But who knows, it might end up being the classic to end all classics...
    Nonsense. The 300 Master Co ax is hardly a dress watch. Compared to a super modern look such as the newer POs sure, it's more refined, but it's no dress watch. Just like the Sub that Connery wore wasn't a dress watch. Let's keep things in perspective here.

    The new 300 MC is already a classic given its heritage. Arguments about lume notwithstanding, it's a classic looking, 50/early 60s looking watch, even if it sits a bit tall (ok by me given the accuracy and anti-mag properties). Had Omega made that watch continuously like Rolex made the Sub for more than half a century they'd be right up there with Rolex, in my mind. They've finally got some sense in what they're doing.
    Last edited by Super Fuzz; July 9th, 2017 at 00:15.
    Ticking away, the moments that make up a dull day...

  7. #187
    Member Vindic8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    811

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by 007_Omega View Post
    Well, Bond never wore the 8900 but I see your point. Hell, Bond drew me to Omega from a young age as the modern Bonds have all worn it (well, my parents/grandparents both wore/wear Omegas as well).

    This may be controversial but would a 2017 James Bond wear a Sub? The Sub of the 60s and the image it brought with it is not the same one it carries today. Back then, it was considered a big watch and it was breaking the mold of the traditional dress watch. It was a classy diver and a maverick. It's something I'd imagine James Bond of the 60s wearing and obviously he wore. Who knows?
    If Ian Fleming was writing his books today he would more likely wear a Pelagos ........ or a GShock. :)

  8. #188
    Member ItnStln's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    764

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vindic8 View Post
    If Ian Fleming was writing his books today he would more likely wear a Pelagos ........ or a GShock. :)
    Has anyone here read the post-Fleming Bond books to see what watch Bond wore?

  9. #189
    Member Theognosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    281

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by 007_Omega View Post
    The 8500/8900 are products of its times and I seriously doubt they will be classics or timeless. They are just too polarizing because of the size.
    The maxicase is a product of its time as well. I predict that those large and ugly lugs will be regarded as abominations in the evolution of the Submariner, GMT and DateJust models in 30 years.
    Rolex Daytona 116520 White Dial | Jaeger-Lecoultre Grande Reverso 976 | Omega Railmaster LE 1957 Trilogy | Omega Speedmaster Pro Moonwatch | Omega PO 8500 42mm Orange Arabics | Omega AT 8500 38.5mm Skyfall | Seiko SKX009 | Seiko SKX007 | Casio G-Shock Mudmaster 1A9 | Citizen EcoDrive Toyota 86 Edition x 3

  10. #190
    Member Galaga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    587

    Re: Why do YOU prefer a PO over a Rolex Submariner?

    Quote Originally Posted by Suijin View Post
    The watches in a line that become classics are usually the ones that represent the essence of the watch, and I believe in the case of the PO that will always be the 42mm 2500. Omega has in subsequent models "blinged" out the watch to a startling extent; applied 12/6/9, glossy dial, colored text, and that's not to mention all the variations which generally even blingier. Will the original PO become a classic? It's already a modern classic by reputation, and the 2201.50/2900.50 are already starting to climb back up in price.

    That's what happened with the SMP300...the Peter Blake, which is probably the "purest" of the line, has become a classic. I'm betting some of the more distilled Bond variants will as well over time.

    I personally don't think the SMP300M will ever reach that threshold, but who knows. It's a gorgeous watch, but it's a dress watch, not a tool watch. It's also essentially an homage watch, not an evolution of a lineage or a new form. But who knows, it might end up being the classic to end all classics...
    Nice summary.

Page 19 of 28 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Similar Threads

    1. Replies: 314
      Last Post: August 2nd, 2017, 03:00
    2. Do any of you prefer Tudor to Rolex
      By mdaclarke in forum Rolex & Tudor
      Replies: 202
      Last Post: June 16th, 2017, 14:13
    3. Would you prefer a Submariner...
      By Don Nghia in forum Rolex & Tudor
      Replies: 53
      Last Post: March 14th, 2017, 00:26
    4. Sandoz submariner (prefer vintage model but nevertheless)
      By hamberg in forum WTB - Wanted to Buy
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: September 27th, 2012, 04:07
    5. RolexFest: Rolex Submariner 50th Aniversary 16610 LV, Green Bezel & Rolex Submariner 18 Kt
      By Alex Collector in forum Watches - Private sellers and Sponsors
      Replies: 0
      Last Post: May 9th, 2008, 04:52

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •