Community Stories

first Omega: Constellation vs Seamaster

stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
Hello dear fellow Omega enthusiasts! Thank you for all the help you've provided me already! Following your advice I took some time and found a beautiful Constellation 167.021. It's a real joy to wear and watch! However later on I checked the seller offers and found, also in beautiful condition, a Seamaster 165.067 and started having second thoughts about my choice. It's my first mechanical watch, so the decision process is tough for me! Therefore I would like to ask you for help and advice, which would you choose and why? I know it's ultimately a matter of preference but I suppose there are some aspects to it that could be discussed. It will be my daily wearer and I will be looking for a steel bracelet for it.
1. Constellation is 33mm, Seamaster is 35mm (win for Seamaster)
2. Constellation was rated chronometer (win for Constellation)
3. Seamaster has no bezel, I like simplicity (win for Seamaster)
4. Constellation has more contrasty dial (win for Constellation)
5. Constellation has 712, Seamaster has 552 movement (?)

From what I read about the movements, both are regarded. 712 seems to be known for it's small form factor and 552 seems to be part of the Omega's best family of movements. Please share your thoughts and help me with the decision process 😀) thank you, cheers!
 
gatorcpa
Posts
13,309
Likes
18,419
We cannot think without pictures.

The watches might be totally equal, but condition is very important.
gatorcpa
 
Dan S
Posts
24,237
Likes
53,973
Neither for me. The 165.067 is one of my least favorite Seamasters. The 167.021 is on the small side for me, and I prefer earlier Constellations, TBH.

You will get more engagement with photos, not everyone knows the reference numbers or wants to be forced to google.
 
GuiltyGear
Posts
670
Likes
2,003
The Constellation with the cal. 712 is from the ultra thin series. I have a SMDV ultra thin with a cal. 711 and it looks and wears really nice. But that's a 34mm watch and it's on the limits of what I would personally wear. If you can wear 33mm than great.

I'm also not particularly a fan of 165.067; too much metal, weird lugs, weird bezel. 168.022 is imo a much better series.
 
X350 XJR
Posts
13,483
Likes
31,777
Neither for me, both oddballs in my book, but we're not shopping for me.
 
stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
Thanks for your responses, here are the pictures. I have chosen those models primarily based on my no-date preference, simple dial design and supposedly good movements. Is there anything particular that you would suggest considering?
 
Screenshot_20240222-123501.png Screenshot_20240224-203839.png
stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
GuiltyGear GuiltyGear
The Constellation with the cal. 712 is from the ultra thin series. I have a SMDV ultra thin with a cal. 711 and it looks and wears really nice. But that's a 34mm watch and it's on the limits of what I would personally wear. If you can wear 33mm than great.

I'm also not particularly a fan of 165.067; too much metal, weird lugs, weird bezel. 168.022 is imo a much better series.

168.022 looks great, does it have a no-date brother?
 
stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
gatorcpa gatorcpa
We cannot think without pictures.

The watches might be totally equal, but condition is very important.
gatorcpa
Thanks for your response. I added the pictures. Both watches are in excellent condition and were serviced.
 
Dan S
Posts
24,237
Likes
53,973
stefan.biedronka stefan.biedronka
Thanks for your responses, here are the pictures. I have chosen those models primarily based on my no-date preference, simple dial design and supposedly good movements. Is there anything particular that you would suggest considering?
There are a gazillion no-date Seamasters and Constellations with simple dials and good movements. I wouldn't even know where to start listing references. Do you have any other criteria to help narrow it down? Any Seamaster starting with 165 will be no-date, I imagine that there are dozens. Just start typing 165.001, 165.002, 165.003, etc. into Google. You will have a lot of new options before you get to 165.067.
 
Dan S
Posts
24,237
Likes
53,973
lawler lawler
168.022 gets my vote
Just adding photos, without which the thread is useless.

omega_seamaster_sparkle_dial.jpeg
 
stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
Dan S Dan S
There are a gazillion no-date Seamasters and Constellations with simple dials and good movements. I wouldn't even know where to start listing references. Do you have any other criteria to help narrow it down? Any Seamaster starting with 165 will be no-date, I imagine that there are dozens. Just start typing 165.001, 165.002, 165.003, etc. into Google. You will have a lot of new options before you get to 165.067.

Dan, thanks for that information, as a complete novice I was unaware of this. When it comes to requirements, besides for no-date dial, I am looking for a watch with standard lugs, not the straight ones, as I started going from 165.001 there were many watches with very short lugs, giving it some what retro look, at least to me. I am looking for something more modern in look. Also I prefer straight hands (or any other) over the dauphines. Automatic movement, preferably chronometer certified, with central second hand. Can you name some models that would fit those requirements? Thanks a lot : ))
 
Dan S
Posts
24,237
Likes
53,973
Chronometers start with 168, but in your place, I wouldn't limit myself that way. You won't generally get any real improvement 50 years later, and the dial is just busier. I'd suggest taking some time to do more comprehensive research. I think you are focusing on some things that don't matter much and ignoring some things that might be much more important.

And maybe just spend time looking at watches. You may find that your tastes change a lot within the first few months of looking, so you shouldn't rush. You are already second-guessing your first choice.
Edited:
 
Syrte
Posts
7,651
Likes
21,950
stefan.biedronka stefan.biedronka
Is there anything particular that you would suggest considering?
The lugs look way overpolished to me on that Seamaster you posted, to me it looks very off putting. You should be patient and read the thread “Learn how to fish”. Also you should browse and search the sales forum here for various models of Constellations and Seamasters people have sold over the years, that will give you an idea.
 
stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
Dan S Dan S
Chronometers start with 168, but in your place, I wouldn't limit myself that way. You won't generally get any real improvement 50 years later, and the dial is just busier. I'd suggest taking some time to do more comprehensive research. And maybe just spend time looking at watches. You may find that your tastes change a lot within the first few months of looking, so you shouldn't rush.
Thanks for the input. I am aware that after such a long time the chronometer rating might not mean much but I like the idea that the watch, at least at the production time, has been submitted to those tests and passed them.
Regarding taking time, I did that😀 last two months my brain is watches: I watch watches, read about watches, talk about watches - waiting for them to visit me in my dreams. Seriously though, what you described has happened already, I came a long way with choosing THE watch... And honestly, as we speak and as I listed all my requirements, then I looked at the little Connie on my wrist, I thought "ain't you the one?". I will most probably just stick to my initial choice, keep it, enjoy it and be happy about how small it is and how well it fits under sleeve : )
 
PXL_20240223_150847919.jpg
Dan S
Posts
24,237
Likes
53,973
I think it might look a lot better on a nicer strap. That can make a big difference.
 
stefan.biedronka
Posts
19
Likes
5
Dan S Dan S
I think it might look a lot better on a nicer strap. That can make a big difference.

Yes! Looking forward to getting a steel bracelet. Just need to find a one that fits 😀 I did have a look at the model ref - end link chart and it might take time to find the end links that are required for my model. Or is there any way around?
 
GuiltyGear
Posts
670
Likes
2,003
stefan.biedronka stefan.biedronka
I will most probably just stick to my initial choice, keep it, enjoy it and be happy about how small it is and how well it fits under sleeve : )

I think it looks really good on your wrist. Don't look further. A textured brown strap will complement it well, adding some color and texture to the mostly grey watch.

@jankoxxx is a resident strap maker and very good at it. Here's my 168.022 with a strap from him.

IMG_20240110_223920.jpg
 
14 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

texascollectors

Looking for first Omega Constellation. Advice appreciated

texascollectors Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
lenndon
lenndon
Posts
19
Views
313
Probo

Seamaster 300 Big Triangle Vs. Seamaster CK 2913

Probo Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Caselock
Caselock
Posts
34
Views
7K
mutha1966

Seamaster vs Seamaster Chronometer

mutha1966 Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Bruce235
Bruce235
Posts
6
Views
2K
zebrespace

REDUCED First Omega Constellation 2648-1

zebrespace Private Watch Sales
zebrespace
zebrespace
Posts
18
Views
11K
VisionOmega

Omega constellation vs seamaster first buy

VisionOmega Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Spruce
Spruce
Posts
19
Views
4K
G

Planet ocean vs seamaster

gaz1234 Modern Omega Watches
G
gaz1234
Posts
13
Views
7K