wonder how these compare...aesthetically

Thread: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Member DaBaeker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    States: east -nyc/phila
    Posts
    6,644

    wonder how these compare...aesthetically










    Npt that their spectacular or anything like that but these are my basic everyday silver dialed/SS autos. Its been hard for me to give them all equal wrist time despite liking them all almost equally. (If I had to pick one I would be very distraught if told the constellation had to go -even though I dropped it hard 2 days ago and it now needs a service)

    So-the question is-if anybody cares-what,if any are the major differences? I don't mean in the movement. I know the rlx and Omega are cosc grade but in terms of style is it likely that to the general public they would come off as nearly identical? Does one over any other stand out to a wis? I just snagged a pretty sweet SM cal 342 with sub sec and I'm wondering if I'll find it even harder to wear them all and maybe one should go.

    As a collector the logic goes:

    1-Connie: never sell a connie period.(just mo)

    2-DJ: its a rlx and its worth more. other people like it and its accurate as hell

    3.Conquest-just started getting into Longines so it too early-only have 2

    4.SM cal 490-I was told it was a cal 471 which was the 1st full rotor auto by O but it wasnt. I kept it anyway but its not an essential piece for a collection. But then I'm not really too sure what a small but 'essential' SM collection would involve. What bumper is the best, what rotor, etc.

    sorry-just blathering and organizing photbkt albums

    Oh-p.s.-does anybody think the Longines conquest and the DJ look as much alike(generally) as I do?
    Last edited by DaBaeker; December 9th, 2010 at 07:00.
    :ROLEX OMEGA LONGiNES ♦ SEIKO Aquadive ♦ ELGIN ♦ hamilton O&W imexZodiac......

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    1,653

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    Quote Originally Posted by DaBaeker View Post
    4.SM cal 490-I was told it was a cal 471 which was the 1st full rotor auto by O but it wasnt. I kept it anyway but its not an essential piece for a collection. But then I'm not really too sure what a small but 'essential' SM collection would involve. What bumper is the best, what rotor, etc.
    I don't know what an essential SM would involve but it would certainly include the Beads of Rice bracelet like yours has.

  3. #3
    Member DaBaeker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    States: east -nyc/phila
    Posts
    6,644

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    Quote Originally Posted by nsmike View Post
    I don't know what an essential SM would involve but it would certainly include the Beads of Rice bracelet like yours has.
    Thanks. That bor is THE most comfortable mesh I own hands down.

    I guess I mean 'essential' as in: collecting the first bumper auto or the 'best' Omega bumper (whatever that is (cal 342, 354?), then the first full rotor auto (cal 471) and then maybe any cal 5xx that was a significant tech advancement over the previous model. I know some collectors do collect for calibers and other for rare and not-so-rare models. I'm at the point where I have enough Omegas where I want to concentrate on some point of collecting that makes sense. But my collection is scattershot and I havnt decided what direction to go. Im soliciting opinions just to see if I come up with anything.

    I don't even know if I want to continue with Omega.Longines seems great and there are WAY more bargains to be had. I'm pretty much done with chronographs but I'll always have a thing for vintage dives.

    sigh-so many old watches...so little time
    :ROLEX OMEGA LONGiNES ♦ SEIKO Aquadive ♦ ELGIN ♦ hamilton O&W imexZodiac......

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    1,653

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    I understood what you wrote, I'm just don't have the knowledge to attempt an answer, that may be a question better asked on the Omega Forum.

  6. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NJ / Philly
    Posts
    7,645

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    Let's see if I can start to answer.

    The Omegas you posted are 561 and 564 chronometers and a 490. The 490 is nice but doesn't compare to the 56x chronometers. Omega made the tolerances better as they learned the ropes of 360˚ rotor automatics, so the early ones weren't bad but not as accurate as the 56x. I'd rather have a chronometer 352 or 354 bumper than one of Omega's early full rotor calibers. Bumpers have a quirkiness and character that Omega's full rotor autos lacked in the 50's. One interesting movement is the 591 from 1960. It was only made that year to bridge the gap between the 50x and 55x/56x series. They're capable of chronometer performance - mine runs at 0 to +3 seconds a day. My opinion is that their 564 was the culmination of all they learned, and was the last great series Omega made before they cheapened their quality to compete with quartz watches. That being said, the Longines 291 had the most efficient and durable winding system. BTW, I share your thoughts on Omega - love the brand but there are no secrets or bargains anymore and the prices have plateaued. It kind of takes one aspect of the hunt out of the equation, you know? Longines is just emerging now and were considered a slightly higher end brand than Omega in the 40's, 50's and 60's. Omega did close the gap in the mid 60's though.

    oh, Da - check your PM's.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    34

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    If aesthetics is the question I rate them Constellation, Seamaster, Longines, then the Rolex. I don't quite know why but the Rolex brand doesn't excite me much. I'm always on the hunt for a nice Omega or Longines and of course the lesser brands as well. Your examples are all quite fine.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    315

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    Quote Originally Posted by DaBaeker View Post


    ...
    Oh-p.s.-does anybody think the Longines conquest and the DJ look as much alike(generally) as I do?
    Nope. Hands and indexes are completely different: On the Rlx they are "square" and look pretty boring. Your Longines has these fantastic two-storey ones:




    And look at these dagger style hands! Keep the Longines and sell the rest.

  9. #8
    Member DaBaeker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    States: east -nyc/phila
    Posts
    6,644

    Re: wonder how these compare...aesthetically

    Quote Originally Posted by o.v.e View Post
    Nope. Hands and indexes are completely different: On the Rlx they are "square" and look pretty boring. Your Longines has these fantastic two-storey ones:




    And look at these dagger style hands! Keep the Longines and sell the rest.
    Ok-I'll admit that I did think the conquest had some similarities to the dj at 1st but what I really think I meant was I am actually liking the Longines better. I picked up a JB 'longines' brickmesh bracelet and ever since then I feel like what you said is true-the DJ just seems more ordinary. Sure the logo is nicely placed but the conquet is a little cooler and the 12-3-6-9 points are a subtle but nice detail. It keeping almost within cosc as well except for the very odd experience of the second hand suddenly started clipping the '11' and making the movemnet halt. About a 15 minute job and its back to snuff but I cant figure out how it shifted. Hope its not a loose hand.

    Also-I agree with above poster that the 'C' connie is aesthetically the nicest case/movement. The case may not be the most popular connie but the side profile where it looks like a square chunk of steel slightly bent to a perfect curve fascinates me how it blends from that squarish design to the more traditional 'c' style front-on look. After that its the conquest, and the dj and SM are tied-but just for looks-not for quality/caliber

    and ulf-I totally agree that the 561 is a culmination and zenith of Omega technology almost unmatched to this day. After your post on longines I obviously have a new found appreciation for not only my 431 but the 290 and whatever else I can find interesting. And I just picked up a new 354 SM [which is what prompted this whole thread as I may want to get rid of the SM490 now being that I have a 50s bumper an I can use the money to repair my 'c' case which I just dropped and the balance staff jewel popped out and , naturally, it needs some attention which I hope isnt major.
    :ROLEX OMEGA LONGiNES ♦ SEIKO Aquadive ♦ ELGIN ♦ hamilton O&W imexZodiac......

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

    Posting Permissions

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