Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)
Like Tree73Likes

Thread: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69
  1. #1
    Member Vlance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    5,706

    Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Ok, so about a month ago, I purchased an SMPc (for the second time) and am trying to love it. However, I just can't get over, how from certain angles it doesn't seem proportioned well. The older style (2531.80) model, in my opinion has a much nicer flow incorporated into the design.

    The problem I think, with the SMPc, is the thicker bezel. It's measures 4.5mm from the case, and accounts for roughly 35% of the 12.8mm thick watch.

    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414633776.909205.jpg
Views: 3975
Size:  217.0 KB

    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414633806.024733.jpg
Views: 3966
Size:  202.2 KB

    Where, the 2531.80's bezel is 3.5mm and accounts for about 30% of the watch's 11.5mm thickness.

    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414633889.400321.jpg
Views: 3942
Size:  295.3 KB

    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414633912.233784.jpg
Views: 3923
Size:  223.3 KB

    I know this doesn't seem like a lot, and the caseback on the SMPc is thicker as well, but it looks a lot different in comparison.




    So, I began to wonder, why the new SMPc needed to have added thickness. I thought that maybe it was due to the movement change, but from what I've found (and I could be wrong) is that the 1120 is 4mm thick and the 2500 is 4.1mm thick (the 2500d with the three level coaxial may be thicker but I could not find info).
    So it's not specific to the movement necessarily.
    I then looked at the dial and thought maybe it could be the introduction of the applied indices. The raised markers would require the hands to be set to a new tolerance to clear them.

    Attachment 1864930

    However, it seemed there was more than enough room, which brought my attention to the how the hands were set.

    Attachment 1865026

    You can actually see some of the gold movement where the hands are attached, and there appears to be at least 1mm of space between the dial and hour hand.

    (2531.80 as reference)

    Attachment 1865042

    So while I could envision the need to raise up the hands, the hour hand doesn't even reach the indices. It seems for some reason, the posts for the hands are much higher up than they need to be.

    Attachment 1865074

    The outcome is, increased crystal height from the dial, and a thicker looking bezel, stretched to accommodate this.

    To me, it seems like some kind of design flaw having the hands sit so high, unless omega was really trying to give more of a 3 dimensional look to the dial.

    When compared side by side though, you can really tell how the thickness makes the SMPc look more chunky. ( keep in mind, the case size is the same width and length, crystal and bezel are the exact same size too).


    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414630675.527263.jpg
Views: 4145
Size:  222.3 KB

    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414630808.320338.jpg
Views: 4056
Size:  233.8 KB

    I just wanted to point out my observations. I hope omega can maybe fix that issue and bring the case dimensions back down to a more proportionate scale (Perhaps on a newer model?). I know it may not be everyone's opinion, but as far as being aesthetically pleasing, I find the earlier, slimmer, 2531.80 case to be much more appealing.

    Lastly, features I enjoy with regards to the SMPc:
    - ceramic insert
    - visual appeal of the AR coated crystal
    - longers hands
    - applied markers and logo
    - stunning lacquer dial
    - raised silver print on dial
    - silver print date wheel
    - accurate 2500d movement
    - updated caseback design
    - screw in pins on bracelet
    - cleaner look of omega print on clasp

    Features I'm not so much into:
    - bezel insert font
    - worrying about scratching AR coating
    - thickness of bezel and overall case (chunky feel)
    - thought lume would be much brighter
    - lower beat rate from movement (25200)
    - the less rounded finish on the bracelet
    - the rougher edges on clasp and overall clasp design ( the old one houses the folding pieces, and diver extension all inside, where the new one has parts extend outside of it)

    Features I enjoy regarding the SMP 2531.80:
    - gorgeous blue insert and very clear silver font
    - low profile bezel and overall slim case dimensions
    - no AR coating on outside of crystal
    - iconic blue wave dial
    - nice bright green lume
    - super solid workhorse movement
    - sleek, well finished bracelet (very comfortable)
    - very nicely engineered clasp

    Features I'm not fond of:
    - scratch prone insert
    - glare off crystal
    - hands are a little too short


    Thanks for reading.

    Vlance
    Last edited by Vlance; October 30th, 2014 at 03:52.

  2. #2
    Member Toothbras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
    Posts
    23,750

    Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Vlance, why are buying (and re-buying) the ceramic version when you already own the best SMP ever (and IMO one of the top 3 Omegas of all time) by having the 2531? I agree with a lot of your pros/cons but overall you'll never be happy with any other version once you've worn the King!

    Last edited by Toothbras; October 30th, 2014 at 03:59. Reason: Added pic

  3. #3
    Member Vlance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    5,706

    Re: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Quote Originally Posted by Toothbras View Post
    Vlance, why are buying (and re-buying) the ceramic version when you already own the best SMP ever (and IMO one of the top 3 Omegas of all time) by having the 2531? I agree with a lot of your pros/cons but overall you'll never be happy with any other version once you've worn the King!

    How boring would life be if I just bought a watch, was happy with it and didn't waste thousands in the process of it all? ;)

    I think ultimately, I will always keep a 2531.80, and a rolex sub or sd. I would be ok with that.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    538

    Re: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    My only Omega is the 2531 and it's my daily wearer, rarely taken off. When I was researching which diver to buy, I compared the 2531 with the SMPc and I was pleased that the one I preferred happened to be the cheaper (older) version. I totally agree with Toothbras: to me, the 2531 didn't need improving (apart from upgrading to the ceramic bezel, which I do think is a nice feature).


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    ff25 and Vinny_S like this.

  6. #5
    Member iam7head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, Hong kong
    Posts
    6,531

    Re: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Quote Originally Posted by joe.d View Post
    My only Omega is the 2531 and it's my daily wearer, rarely taken off. When I was researching which diver to buy, I compared the 2531 with the SMPc and I was pleased that the one I preferred happened to be the cheaper (older) version. I totally agree with Toothbras: to me, the 2531 didn't need improving (apart from upgrading to the ceramic bezel, which I do think is a nice feature).


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The product update added quite a bit of product features but it doesn't always translate into positive user experience or user benefit.

    The added thickness due to ceramic bezel is understandable, it's almost the industry standard now so it's quite safe and understandable for Omega to invest into the ceramic bezel. You can say the same about screwed bracelet link as well.

    But for me the glossy dial is nice and sharp but the wave dial has a lot of SMP DNA, IMHO a tad too much just to get rid of. I would totally understand if they make the special edition with glossy dial like the POLM or even Bond movies LE version just to set it apart but dropping all the wave dial on the SMPC line up is just....very bold.(and too bold for me)

    Back to the thickness change: it's not too bad for a ceramic bezel diver, the SubmarinerC also when thru similar "beef up" operation with the maxi case and dial. Seems to be standard answer for popular XL size trend now. I am already quite happy they didn't increase the size to 44-45mm which IMHO it's way too much for a dressy diver like the SMP/SMPC.

    at the end of the day if the aluminium bezel version makes you happy then that's all it matter :)
    Attached Images Attached Images



    Kluber, SeaMonster and Londonboy like this.

  7. #6
    Member Kluber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,682

    Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Vlance - Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience with both versions of the SMP.

    This is a good thread for those who have not yet had the opportunity to own various SMPs but are currently in the market for one. Little things to consider in such decisions. Good post. Cheers.
    Last edited by Kluber; October 30th, 2014 at 12:08.

  8. #7
    Member Kluber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,682

    Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Quote Originally Posted by iam7head View Post

    But for me the glossy dial is nice and sharp but the wave dial has a lot of SMP DNA, IMHO a tad too much just to get rid of. I would totally understand if they make the special edition with glossy dial like the POLM or even Bond movies LE version just to set it apart but dropping all the wave dial on the SMPC line up is just....very bold.(and too bold for me)
    I agree with this. I know many prefer the dressier look of the glossy dial, but the waves were very unique to the SMP & gave it visual distinction from other luxury divers in the market. It's still a nice piece (SMPc), but is trending on resembling other dive watches now (perhaps with the exception of the blue smpc) vice being uniquely different (IMHO). For me, the wavy dial created that difference.

    Name:  ImageUploadedByTapatalk1414664028.736578.jpg
Views: 3770
Size:  106.8 KB
    Last edited by Kluber; October 30th, 2014 at 12:18.
    iam7head likes this.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Posts
    27

    Re: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    What about the 2220.80? I've been looking at all 3 of these (2531, 2220, and SMPc), and chose the middle one as a perfect compromise.

    Here are the pics from the sale thread where I bought it: SMP 2220.80

    To me, it strikes the perfect balance in the middle between the other two, but being much thinner than SMPc. Plus, it still has the symbolic wave dial I could not live without!

    As SMPc:
    - co-axial escapement
    - raised indices
    - longer hands
    - pretty case back
    - AR coated sapphire
    - "Seamaster" in red

    As 2531:
    - beautiful wave dial
    - old thin bezel (I think watch is only ~1 mm thicker than 2531, mostly due to case back)
    - old font on the bezel
    - old bracelet design with all elements enclosed in clasp

    Last edited by walmark; October 30th, 2014 at 13:59.

  10. #9
    Member Keaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,053

    Re: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    I noticed it from day one of the SMPc being released, the slab sided design of the bezel, compared to the beautiful streamlined and low profile look of the original bezel. And that is what has always stopped me from getting one. I love the look of both new and old dials and bezel inserts (either aluminium or ceramic, and even stainless steel on my Ti SMP), but the original case and bezel proportions were definitely so much more aesthetically appealing. I also don't like Omega's screw links, fiddly little things they are. Give me good old, solid and easy to use pins and collars any day! Or at least do the screws right (kudos to Rolex and their big meaty link screws, now those I like).
    iam7head and Vlance like this.
    My watch collection has become too big to fit in my signature

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    924

    Re: Omega SMPc vs. SMP 2531.80 (mainly thickness)

    Hey Vlance,

    I understand exactly where you are coming from. I have the 2254.50 Seamaster (Cal 1120) and love it for it's slim (12mm) dimensions. It's by far the most comfortable dive watch I've ever strapped on my wrist and just melts away to the point you're not really conscious it's there.

    More recently I also bought the Great White GMT version of the same watch (iam7head also posted a pic above), and that measures in at 13.6mm due to the extra GMT hand, so an excellent comparison with the SMPc in terms of thickness. Initially I found it hard to bond with the watch due to the increased thickness but I am getting used to it now I've worn it for a few weeks. The jury is still out, but I'm more inclined to keep it now than I was a few weeks ago. We shall see. Maybe I can take some comparison shots of the case thickness with my 2254.50, but as in your comparisons, the extra thickness comes in the form of the thicker bezel and case back.

    Name:  26_GreatWhiteMesh.jpg
Views: 3625
Size:  93.4 KB
    Last edited by Phil_P; October 30th, 2014 at 14:12.
    Vlance, SeaMonster and Londonboy like this.
    Omega SMP 2254.50
    Omega Great White GMT 2538.20

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 1 guests)

  1. Rahul718

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 25th, 2014, 03:11
  2. FS: Omega 1515/816 Bracelet for SMPc (also fits 2254, 2531, 2220 etc)
    By armybuck041 in forum Watches - Straps & Bracelets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: February 2nd, 2014, 02:18
  3. thickness of new SMP and SMPc
    By vumaverick in forum Omega
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 11th, 2012, 17:13
  4. FS: Omega SMP 2531.80.00
    By ChuckT in forum Watches - Private sellers and Sponsors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 26th, 2012, 00:37
  5. FS: Omega SMP 2531.80
    By swedishstar in forum Watches - Private sellers and Sponsors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 26th, 2010, 16:40

Posting Permissions

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