[Mike295855]

I did not want to start a thread on this since I am new--well I was a member in the old forum, but either way. I am curious to see what I don't know about Omega. For example, when I read the comparison betwee the SD and the PO that JBII made, I was amazed to find out that the PO had an anti-reflective coating on both sides. Additionally, I did not know of the metals used for the Omega as compared to the Rolex.

So, I am curious to know what facts you guys can share about Omega?

Here are some starters:

Are they made in switzerland?

Is there a particular practice that Omega has that Rolex may not have?


Please feel free to provide or answer any question. I want to learn as much as possible about Omega especially when it comes to comparing the brand to Rolex. Thank you

 

[wautersjr]

Omega gives bigger discounts :thumbup:

 

[Houston]

Well Mike where do I begin?

Omegas offer an item of value that is in fact undervalued. For the consumer therefore there is an immense " bang for buck " advantage in owning an Omega watch. You can buy a moderately-priced quartz example if accuracy is a major consideration. You can purchase a high-end model that is in the realms of haute horology in the Co-Axial Central Tourbillon that is also a world premier offering. You can also place on your wrist a watch, the DNA of which can be traced back to the one that was created fifty years ago and which has passed two intensive NASA tests beating all comers to be chosen as the first watch flight-qualified for manned space missions. In addition, it remains the only watch that is qualified for Extra Vehicular Activities by NASA. You can marvel at a watch created in the 70s which has remained till today, the most accurate wristwatch in the world and the only one ever to be certified as a Marine Chronometer. You can also read John's review below that puts into perspective how much better off you are buying Omega

http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/smpvssub.html

and you can also pop into the resource and archive section of this forum and marvel at the Watch of The Day threads and see why it is Omega is quite a unique watch company. Which other manufacturer offers the buyer a style for each and every occasion that is priced within realistic parameters?

Omegas are made in Switzerland and the answer to your second question lies in the WOTD threads.


Enjoy your evening

ZIN

 

[Mike295855]

Houston, superb post!

However, I love my PO but I was somewhat surprised that John, when reviewing the PO and the SD, ended up picking the SD. I think the SD is a magical piece and definitely is incredible, no questions or issues with that.

 

[wautersjr]

WOW, Houston's reply was way better than mine... :thumbup:

 

[haakon59]

Omega is manufactured in Switzerland. There are a few differences, for example, Omega has introduced the Co-Axial escapement to some models and this is considered a major development in mechanical watches. Omega tends to be priced a little lower than Rolex, but is roughly the same quality and could be considered a great value for this reason. Lume performance in Omega watches tends to be very high compared to most brands, including Rolex (which I would say is average in regards to this feature).

 

[Houston]

Glad I could have been of some help Mike.

Whilst many of their watches may be undervalued, Omega's achievements certainly come from the top flight and should rightly remain at the forefront of public perception.


Cheerio for now and be well pals

ZIN

 

[ru06]

Thanks, Houston, for referencing this article! I really enjoyed it and agreed with it!

 

[timefinder]

Omega is manufactured in Switzerland. There are a few differences, for example, Omega has introduced the Co-Axial escapement to some models and this is considered a major development in mechanical watches. Omega tends to be priced a little lower than Rolex, but is roughly the same quality and could be considered a great value for this reason. Lume performance in Omega watches tends to be very high compared to most brands, including Rolex (which I would say is average in regards to this feature).

I agree. I have a SUB LV, and I am not impressed with the lume.

 

[timefinder]

BTW, does Omega and Rolex use the same metal for the cases?

 

[Fergie]

are we just sharing facts we have learnt about Omega? Well if that's the case, my favourite little nugget of info I have learnt this year is how the Double Eagle got its name. When I first saw it, I thought the double eagle was in reference to the two bits of metal either side of the case :confused1:. Being new to the whole watch world, I just thought it was another peice of watch jargon, like a flyback, or column wheel. With all the terms, does a double eagle sound that odd? Not really. So I was very surprised and delighted to find out it is named after one of the hardest shots in golf, three under par on a par five hole.:lol:

 

[haakon59]

BTW, does Omega and Rolex use the same metal for the cases?

No, Omega uses 316L while Rolex uses 904L (higher nickel content). Hopefully I have those numbers right. Both are stainless steel of course, just slightly different mixes of elements. The rest of the wristwatch industry also uses 316L, Rolex is the only one with 904L. :001_smile:

 

[timefinder]

No, Omega uses 316L while Rolex uses 904L (higher nickel content). Hopefully I have those numbers right. Both are stainless steel of course, just slightly different mixes of elements. The rest of the wristwatch industry also uses 316L, Rolex is the only one with 904L. :001_smile:

Thanks. I knew about Rolex's 904L; but, was having a brain cramp on Omega. Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[J!m]

I did a post on the old forum comparing the 904L and 316L alloys side-by-side.

I still hold to the belief that 310 is a better choice for tool watches, and it polishes up nearly as brilliant as white gold does. (there was another post on white gold VS stainless steel as well, but not by me) but no one at Rolex asked for my opinion...:001_rolleyes:

904 is definitely superior material, but i see no advantage to it at all in a wrist watch. The hardness is nearly the same; impact damage is far more likely that corrosion beyond the limits of 316 (you'd loose your arm before 316 would dissolve)

 

[Fergie]

Jim that last paragraph is priceless.

 

[GradyPhilpott]

Well Mike where do I begin?

You should sell Omegas.

 

[MacDaddy]

Well, I don't know about that.

I knew this guy once whose arm dissolved...

 

[Island Time]

great article houston - i can now refer my rolex snob friend

 

[Mike295855]

No, Omega uses 316L while Rolex uses 904L (higher nickel content). Hopefully I have those numbers right. Both are stainless steel of course, just slightly different mixes of elements. The rest of the wristwatch industry also uses 316L, Rolex is the only one with 904L. :001_smile:

What do you mean by the rest? You mean Invicta and less expensive brands?

I would think that Omega uses superior metals than say Tag or Fossil.

 

[tricky dicky]

The biggest difference for me is that Rolex make all of their own movements in house. Omega source nearly all of their movements, including the new Co-Axial, from ETA, who are a sister company within the Swatch group.

This, for me, still doesn't justify the price hike of a comparable Rolex over the equivalent Omega. Omega are now making some movements in house, most notable the 8500 and 8501 which are in the SS and gold Hour Visions respectively.

Omega are slowly catching Rolex as the biggest high-end watch manufacturer, IMHO.

Hope this helps.