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.
Where, the 2531.80's bezel is 3.5mm and accounts for about 30% of the watch's 11.5mm thickness.
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.
However, it seemed there was more than enough room, which brought my attention to the how the hands were set.
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)
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.
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).
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.