From selling the Seamaster 300 60LE to a No date or BB 58?

Riviera Paradise · Oct 22, 2018

Pun
Yes they can be done by Seamaster as well. Its just a matter of aesthetics and style perhaps. Explorer is sleeker and more of a dressy tool watch than the Seamaster. Explore has better lumes that last much longer than the Omega.

Have not seen the lume on the Seamster 60th LE, but from personal experience I would say the lume on the Seamaster 300MC is just as good as the modern Explorer...and both lose out to the lume on my Explorer 2 and Seiko Samurai.

Pun · Oct 22, 2018

Riviera Paradise
Have not seen the lume on the Seamster 60th LE, but from personal experience I would say the lume on the Seamaster 300MC is just as good as the modern Explorer...and both lose out to the lume on my Explorer 2 and Seiko Samurai.

That’s right. Seiko has brighter light indeed.
My Explorer’s lume last for around 10-12 hours after a full charge by iPhone for a minute at night. I wear Explorer 1 at night daily just to check time when break my sleep at night.
I’ve Seiko Turtle PADI and it’s lume also last throughout the night but it’s much heavier than Explorer 1.
I also have Railmaster LE 60th Anniversary and it’s lume is weaker than Rolex any day.

Al22 · Oct 22, 2018

yeah, the lume is weaker. The lume from my PO 2500 was brighter too. But that´s not a big deal for me 😀
The best lume has my Luminox

Green Omega · Oct 22, 2018

Seamaster 60th for me - it’s limited. It’s a great reissue. It’s more unique than the Exp 1.

DIV · Oct 22, 2018

I actually flipped my SM300LE60 for an Explorer 214270 Mark 2...no reservations. I still love my Railmaster LE60, but had to scratch the itch and try the Trilogy Seamaster. I enjoyed it for a couple months, but had to sell it to fund the Explorer.
If you have the opportunity go with the Mark 2...proper handset, lumed numbers....it's hard to beat.

DIV · Oct 22, 2018

And by the way, the Chromalite lume on the Explorer outshines the lume on the Trilogy models. Here it is next to my Railmaster...

Pun · Oct 22, 2018

DIV
I actually flipped my SM300LE60 for an Explorer 214270 Mark 2...no reservations. I still love my Railmaster LE60, but had to scratch the itch and try the Trilogy Seamaster. I enjoyed it for a couple months, but had to sell it to fund the Explorer.
If you have the opportunity go with the Mark 2...proper handset, lumed numbers....it's hard to beat.

I find Mk1 Explorer more interesting as solid white gold 3 6 and 9 give more elegance and make it a dressy tool watch. The new edition looks more like a common Ranger watch to me. The so-called short hand of Mk1 doesn’t bother in real life.

Al22 · Oct 23, 2018

I will think about it carefully. Maybe I got the Explorer and after a short period of time I am looking for a Submariner, because I am more into diver and liked them more.

DIV · Oct 23, 2018

A Al22
I will think about it carefully. Maybe I got the Explorer and after a short period of time I am looking for a Submariner, because I am more into diver and liked them more.

Yes, that was one of the reasons I was able let go of the Seamaster 300 LE....I have a 2-line 14060M and that's a tough one to beat...

Al22 · Oct 23, 2018

DIV
Yes, that was one of the reasons I was able let go of the Seamaster 300 LE....I have a 2-line 14060M and that's a tough one to beat...

I can fully understand. I had a chance to buy a 14060M in 2012. I regret that I didn´t buy it. Nowadays I think it´s a awesome piece.
In 2012 I compared it with the Planet O.22054 and bought the PO. The feeling of the PO was more high grade.

Maybe a new Submariner, if the case gets smaller like as the new DeepS.

Stufflers Mom · Oct 23, 2018

I think with so many votes for the Rolex on an Omega forum must count for something.

Ottsby · Oct 23, 2018

This one is a no brainer for me - the Explorer (but I might be a bit biased as I own both the latest gen Explorer as well as the 114270 one.

Ottsby · Oct 23, 2018

Ssunnylee24
I am also looking to pick up the 214270 my self.
Torn between mk1 and mk2.

Mk II all the way. The lume numerals look much more balanced than the oversized silver ones, and the minute hand is too short on the Mk I

kuchars22 · Oct 23, 2018

I have the Explorer 1 with update hands and lume. Couldn't decide which one to keep - this or the 145.022-75/74 as a daily. I've decided to sell the Explorer now even though it's 40 years younger! The reason? Both are stunning watches in their own ways, but I love the nostalgic of vintage. However, Exp 1 vs SM...no contest...has to be Exp 1.

In fact, just acquired another watch a few moments ago so the vintage speedy may have to go after all!

JG808 · Oct 23, 2018

Another vote for the Exp. 1. I do think the Seamaster has more personality, but the Explorer is one of the most versatile pieces around. Hard to go wrong with either, but Explorer is my vote.

kuchars22 · Oct 23, 2018

What people often forget, is that the Exp 1 is not supposed to be a showy watch. It's basically an Oyster Perpertual, one of Rolex's longest standing model ranges, and the one that set the standard for all other movements. It maintains the no-date dial but adds a touch of sportiness with the mercedes hands and oyster clasp. If one wanted a more sportier look, then they either get a sportier Rolex or look elsewhere.

I agree Exp1 vs SM is like apples vs pears. Aqua Terra would be a better comparison (no turning bezel watch)

keepitsimple · Oct 23, 2018

K kuchars22
I agree Exp1 vs SM is like apples vs pears. Aqua Terra would be a better comparison (no turning bezel watch)

Agree 100%, but the OP has an LE 300 to consider swapping, not the AT.

If we were actually comparing Exp 1 against the AT (especially the version immediately prior to the current one) I'd find it a much more difficult choice to make.
I do find the AT gets a tad more wrist time than the Exp1, but both are watches I'd be very reluctant to part with.

In terms of timekeeping performance, there is nothing of any significance to choose between them.

Pun · Oct 23, 2018

Ottsby
Mk II all the way. The lume numerals look much more balanced than the oversized silver ones, and the minute hand is too short on the Mk I

I feel Mk1 is going to be a future classic and a sought after watch for collectors sooner than we all can expect. It’s a TinTin of Rolex! We will discuss this in next 5 years....

Ottsby · Oct 23, 2018

Pun
I feel Mk1 is going to be a future classic and a sought after watch for collectors sooner than we all can expect. It’s a TinTin of Rolex! We will discuss this in next 5 years....

Quasi-vintage Explorers will never be really collectible, you have to get a 1016, they were produced in way too large numbers. The Mk I was sloppy IMO, the short minute hand looks crazy and the silver numerals were transferred to the new Air King, which has to be the least popular modern sport Rolex.

Now give me a 114270 instead...

Pun · Oct 23, 2018

Ottsby
Quasi-vintage Explorers will never be really collectible, you have to get a 1016, they were produced in way too large numbers. The Mk I was sloppy IMO, the short minute hand looks crazy and the silver numerals were transferred to the new Air King, which has to be the least popular modern sport Rolex.

Now give me a 114270 instead...

Since you know that “Mk1 was sloppy and short minute hand looked crazy”, that very faults would make it collectible.

TinTin is collectible on same premise that it is somewhat not a complete watch as originally envisaged by Omega.

A watch made by a major Swiss brand, as big as Omega and/or Rolex, that is faulty in any respect is not a everyday feature. These mistakes make watches very collectible after their supplies dries up.

We’ve to wait only for 5-10 years to see how these will gather upward momentum. It’s time to buy them if you like. They otherwise are very interesting watches, to say the least.