There is an auction for a beautiful Constellation on the 'bay, and there is speculation it may command nearly $5k.

<http://bit.ly/1kaTEav>

The listing prompted a thought to pop into my head. If presented with the choice of this Constellation, or a Rolex President in the same condition from the same year (also on a nice leather strap), which would you choose and why? I'll start...

As lovely as the Constellation is, and as uncommon as it is to find an example in such fine condition, I would opt for a President. Chatting with my watchmaker and reading on the 'net, it is argued that the Rolex has a better regulating system and is therefore more accurate, especially in terms of positional error. The President is an icon among wristwatches. It is not without its faults, especially with the perception of the folks who champion the brand. Image aside, I think the President is a well-constructed, attractive timepiece. My assessment of similar values between the President and the Constellation may be off, but I hope I have come close to the "apples to apples" comparison.

Thoughts?

 

First off if this is the Constellation you're talking about...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/351019603839Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

...from the recommended vintage Omega thread it is only silly money that will bring it up to 5K, if that even happens. This is De Luxe money, even above De Luxe money (didn't pat that much for mine!) and the Connie in question is not worth any where near this. So the comparison your making may not be apples to apples. Just my two cents...

 

Some necessary corrections:

First, a Rolex President is named so because of the bracelet. It's a Day / Date head with a President bracelet.

Second, Omega made better movements than Rolex did then and held greater esteem in the watch buying public's eyes. It wasn't until the 80's that they flip flopped positions. Your watchmaker is in the minority about 50's and 60's caliber quality. Omega had quite a track record for not only chronometer performance, but also their standard movement's performance.

 

To me, it's


although both have certainly earned their place in the pantheon of vintage classics.

 

Genetics. Not a fan of the wart myself, and I prefer the smooth bezel models of DJ over their serrated cousins too.

 

Agreed. Hadn't really thought of it that way but it makes perfect sense.

Hey! That's what they said at the Rolex Forum!

I'm not a big fan of the Falooted Bezel either, and prefer a smooth crystal. The blister doesn't bother me too much though.

And the old man comment? Guilty myself...Anyone else a fan of the Patek Philippe Ellipse? Didn't think so...

It's okay to like Omega AND Rolex, right? I do like Elvis AND The Beatles! But you can tell by my preference for the Day-Date I'm more of an Elvis guy (saw a concert in Tahoe, 1976).

 

Right here. I blue dials!

Sure. Many of the members and mods own both brands. I used to own the odd Rolex, and although I don't anymore I wouldn't mind a Root Beer GMT, Zephyr, or a 5513. I still have a healthy respect for their watches.

 

Didn't know the Ellipse existed. That's the ugliest Patek I've ever seen.

Finally, one I don't want!

 

You're not alone. Maybe you saw the blue dial? Check out BROWN! (BTW Dennis, I had a Root Beer GMT II. Liked it a lot but don't regret selling it if that makes sense).

And the ugliest Patek (that comes to mind) was the (thankfully discontinued) Neptune. Or as I like to curse it, the Ineptune.

 

Thank you!
I just love finding new watches that I don't want to buy. It happens so rarely. Le sigh.

 

Interesting question. I have both a Rolex (1601 Datejust) and a Connie (14393 with the Cal 561), and love them both! I have dressed up the Omega with a nice alligator strap, and dressed down the DJ with a distressed leather strap...honestly like to wear both. To some, this question is like Sophie's Choice...can't chose one of the favoured children!




I have both on my winder, and the Rolex is always within a minute of the time, whereas the Connie is often a few minutes behind...Will need to bring it in for a service

 

I've always felt that Rolex are over-priced while Omega a much better value buy. As for style, I also prefer Omega which are typically less ostentatious to me and the reason I prefer the brand. Omega are backed by proven pedigree of technology and are the choice of timekeeping by various high-profile institutions. I think Rolex out-manoeuvred Omega by smart marketing to gain the prestige / executive choice position and command the higher price. It's all about personal choice and, much as I try, I just can't love Rolex.

 

Nothing worse than the rolex curse

Is It real?
yes
Oh ( end of conversation)

 

It's one of the reasons I like Omega.

(stranger looks at Omega): "some weather we're having?"

(Omega wearer): "yup."

(end of conversation).

Flying under the radar is a definite plus in my book.