I had the opportunity to handle the black dialed version yesterday at an OB and I was impressed. Just wondering what the real world view is from current owners. In particular, does the anodized aluminum bezel hold up well? What do you like? What don't you like? Thanks.

 

I own one. In fact, I traded the older version for it because I liked it so much.

I’ve owned it for about 6 months and the bezel insert looks as good as the day I got it.

Love the bracelet taper and clasp. Moving to thinner links, more of a taper, female end links, and fewer micro-adjustments in the clasp makes it wear much more comfortably than the previous bracelet. While it still looks good on straps, I always come back to the bracelet in a few days.

Timing is exceptional — averaging less than 1 sec a day when I wear it everyday, to less than 3 sec/day if I switch it out with other watches and let it sit for several hours a day.

Only thing I don’t like are the sunken and lumed numbers — wished they had stuck with the painted white numbers at 3-6-9-12. But that’s a minor quibble.

All in all, it’s a great watch and I’m very happy with it.

 

Thanks for the insight.

 

Can’t comment on the bezel durability issue, but I have the earlier iteration as well, and this one looks and feels better on the wrist. It’s a keeper…

 

I have the blue dial version and have absolutely loved it. I have had it since about May of last year and have no complaints. I originally thought about getting a strap to switch out periodically with the bracelet, but it wears extremely well and I ended up holding off for that reason.

 

I loved the look of it and was convinced I would get one instead of the SMP300m. But then I went to the OB and tried one on. I found the bezel too “cylindrical” if that makes sense? Pretty much a 90 degree angle from the side to the flat part next to the crystal. I took this image to demonstrate it-see the red mark-ups.

I wouldn’t say it’s a bad thing, I just preferred the more curved edges of the SMP300M and ultimately chose that (seaweed).

 

I know other brands like Tudor used anodized aluminum bezel on there BB58. I remember hearing that it was a deliberate design choice made on a vintage inspired watch because it wasn't scratch resistant and would fade overtime to fit the vintage vibe of the watch. Perhaps Omega was trying to do the same thing here?

 

Lolipop- all I got to say, love it

 

Own the black dial version, too large on my Karen Carpenter'esqe wrist, bought it for the lollipop second's hand, sandwich dial, tapered bracelet and lumed bezel - does not disappoint... just wish it fit me better.

 

Looks like you need start working on those forearms.

 

Love the design, just wish it was thinner. Puzzling to see so many vintage design cues, but not the thin vintage form factor.

 

I jerk off 10 times a day, yes with my left hand even though I am a righty, and still nothing.

Nothing.

 

↑this

 

Would it be helpful to get comments about the trilogy as that also has an anodized aluminum bezel?

 

My Seamaster Trilogy -- much use, going strong, bezel still kicking ass.

 

This seems to be a problem across the industry. I have actually sold several modern pieces that I esthetically loved but they wear like a hockey puck. Even Longines and Tudor with their heritage styles just can’t get this right. It’s not as though the new movements require more space than the older automatic movements did- in fact I would think that the technology has gotten better and allows for slimmer case design. I just think that people equate big and heavy with quality.

I have learned to pay less attention to width and more to thickness, lug 2 lug length and lug/ case back shape as those are the things that really affect the fit of the watch.

 

My very first Omega was the 1st generation SMH very recently, and my choice literally came down to the current gen that you are talking about and the prior gen and I spent a lot of time comparing them.

For me, it came down to totally subjective things like the change in the bezel, the recessed quarter numbers versus the silver painted numbers, and the seconds hand. Cost wasn't really an issue.


I think I would have been pretty happy with either but I chose the first generation because of the seconds hand and the recessed numbers- I don't personally like a true lollipop, and that's totally subjective.

My watch is averaging within 0.1 seconds of +1sec per day and is from late 2016. From everything I have read and heard the current generation is at least as accurate as well.

As far as size goes, I understand this complaint but I don't feel like either one of these watches wears too big. The current gen is a hair smaller and maybe feels that way, Donn would be a better ask there though.

That said, I do have a wrist larger than 7", so wrist size will be a factor

 

Adding as evidence.

My trilogy took damage to the bezel (bought it used this way, so unsure how it happened). For what it's worth, doesn't bother me at all, and gives it a more "authentic" vintage vibe. Also saved me a ton on the price

 

Agreed. If you are going for a truly genuine vintage look you can't forget that it de facto includes the inevitable signs of wear.

I prefer the liquid metal insert on the first gen SMH but completely respect rhe anodized aluminum as well