how much of a fail boat is the trilogy series?

padders · Jul 19, 2019

Talk about putting your money where you mouth is, as of half an hour ago I now own all three. Yes I must be mad considering what a fail boat they are*

*I still have no idea what this means!

JPE.88305 · Jul 19, 2019

boxed set or did you just complete the collection?

I like the idea of 3 separate/random pieces to avoid the "Trilogy" writing on the dial...

padders · Jul 19, 2019

Separate. For 2 reasons mainly, first the extra text isn't great IMO but more importantly, much cheaper as separates!

Stevedssd · Jul 19, 2019

padders
Talk about putting your money where you mouth is, as of half an hour ago I now own all three. Yes I must be mad considering what a fail boat they are*

*I still have no idea what this means!

Not mad at all, they are all so nicely made it makes sense to have all three

pIoNeErOfThEnILe · Jul 19, 2019

pIoNeErOfThEnILe
time to hijack this thread.

this is basically for people that have had both.........i know it's personal, and subjective but between the railmaster and the seamaster what are the differences that would make a person prefer one of these over the other?

railmaster - less cluttered, more streamlined/less thick?

seamaster- more popular iconic divers- bigger than the railmaster?

what about fit and other things...are they both the same lug to lug?...do they both wear the same?...is the extra bulk on the seamaster somewhat cumbersome compaired to the railmaster? etc, etc...

anyone?

janw23 · Jul 19, 2019

pIoNeErOfThEnILe
anyone?

I've owned all three, but sold the Seamaster and Railmaster. Great watches, it was only that these two got almost no wear compared to the Speedmaster, so I can offer a perspective from a different angle. I've outlined why I prefer the Speedy here https://omegaforums.net/threads/omega-1957-trilogy-limited-editions---railmaster-seamaster-300-speedmaster’57.55120/page-173#post-1211058.

As to what would make one prefer the SM300 over the RM... objectively, deepwater diving 😜. Leave the rest to preference. For me, the combination of warmer Hesalite crystal and the far subtler use of patina lume on the Speedmaster make it far more visually appealing and adaptable. Obviously, the lume-heavy dial of the RM/SM300 is an unavoidable consequence of the design, but combined with the cold and reflective Sapphire crystal, it just never felt "right" to me. The Trilogy Speedmaster is also rather dressy as far as Speedmasters go, so I didn't feel any need to hang onto the other two.

Of the RM and SM300, I think the Railmaster is the one I would choose. The dial is exposed to a lot more light compared to the SM300, so the look is more natural. There is also something appealing about the sheer simplicity of the dial and the domed crystal, probably the biggest sapphire crystal with the most curvature I have seen on any Omega.

As far as I know, lug-to-lug is the same on all the Trilogy watches, although the lugs will appear more protruded on a relative basis on the Railmaster, because of the lack of a bezel.

Seamaster is a bit thicker, and appears bigger - even though thickness is similar - since a smaller fraction of the height of the Seamaster is crystal. Seamaster is also a little bit heavier on the wrist, but you won't feel it unless you're quite literally trying them on sequentially in a shop.

cholack · Jul 23, 2019

As an owner of the speedmaster 60th, I have zero regrets on that purchase. If it makes you smile each time you put it on, I believe that is NOT a failure.

OP - Maybe you should get one and then come back with your revised opinion 😉

janw23 · Jul 23, 2019

cholack
As an owner of the speedmaster 60th, I have zero regrets on that purchase. If it makes you smile each time you put it on, I believe that is NOT a failure.

OP - Maybe you should get one and then come back with your revised opinion 😉

As another biased owner, agree. The 60th Speedy is one of the finest commemorative editions Omega has made. As time marches on, the market price will begin to reflect this (not that it matters particularly!).

LeonDeBayonne · Jul 23, 2019

J janw23
As another biased owner, agree. The 60th Speedy is one of the finest commemorative editions Omega has made. As time marches on, the market price will begin to reflect this (not that it matters particularly!).

I concur. But if I had to keep only one, I might keep the seamaster. For the simple reason that I wear it in all circumstances : I swim with it, I bike with it, I go to the office with it, I surf with it (I don't dive though), I wear it casually or formally… It's the most flexible watch I have.

janw23 · Jul 23, 2019

LeonDeBayonne
I concur. But if I had to keep only one, I might keep the seamaster. For the simple reason that I wear it in all circumstances : I swim with it, I bike with it, I go to the office with it, I surf with it (I don't dive though), I wear it casually or formally… It's the most flexible watch I have.

Interesting.. I find the Speedmaster to be the all purpose one for my wrist 😀.

Also, I could be wrong but I think it was the Speedmaster specifically that was advertised by Omega as the all purpose watch in 1957, i.e. Railmaster and Seamaster were marketed almost exclusively for their respective utilitarian purposes.

Edit: One thing that is cool about the Seamaster 60th is the count-down bezel, so it is actually useful to time things under an hour.

Taybharr · Jul 23, 2019

When these watches came out, I was a big fan of the Railmaster 60th. I saw one sitting at the local Omega AD a few weeks ago and was surprised at how much I didn't like it in the metal. The faux radium look of the hands just looks orange in my opinion. Didn't care for that aspect.

SouthernScot · Jul 23, 2019

cholack
As an owner of the speedmaster 60th, I have zero regrets on that purchase. If it makes you smile each time you put it on, I believe that is NOT a failure.

OP - Maybe you should get one and then come back with your revised opinion 😉

Totally agree, I was delighted to get one of the two allocated to my AD. It has gradually become almost my daily wearer, it is so comfortable on the wrist and I think Omega got this one spot on. My ST1 and Ed White hardly get a look in. Another big plus is that my wife really likes it! 👍

Value doesn’t come into it really as my watches will eventually go to my two sons, not too soon hopefully.

rominvicta · Jul 23, 2019

cholack
As an owner of the speedmaster 60th, I have zero regrets on that purchase. If it makes you smile each time you put it on, I believe that is NOT a failure.

OP - Maybe you should get one and then come back with your revised opinion 😉

Couldn’t have said it better! 👍

abrod520 · Jul 23, 2019

I bought the Seamaster brand new, since that was the one I wanted the most out of all three and I didn't care if it lost value (which I expected it to). I'll be buying the Railmaster once prices look more attractive and I have a spare $4k, but the Railmaster is more on the dressy side of the equation and I don't tend to wear dressy watches that often - so for the time being, I'm spending my money elsewhere. Really depends on what else is available in the market that year though; I'm more or less content with my vintage collection at this point so if Baselworld or the Swatch events don't turn up anything I want, the Railmaster is at the top of my list. But I wouldn't buy it new since the $2-3k off can be spent on other watches 😀

stevec14 · Jul 24, 2019

P petay993
I have been watching UK pricing on the Speedy version and I would say they have bottomed out at mid £4k with prices creeping up.

It is surprising to me that these are not more highly sought after, maybe a bit too dainty and niche to appeal to the mass market.

The Railmaster is surely becoming a bit of a bargain at £3,500?

Where do you see at £3.5k. The cheapest in the U.K. I saw was £3,700 which was sold by a well known chain on Black Friday????

If it really is that price, I might just re-purchase as I miss it (and actually like it most of the 3)

padders · Jul 24, 2019

pIoNeErOfThEnILe
anyone?

Ok I'll play as I now have all 3 so can so some first hand comparisons. They are rather more different than I previously assumed and all 3 definitely have their own personality. I will ignore the Speemaster for the moment since that has been already discussed at length but the RM has been cruelly over looked to my mind. I had wrongly assumed the RM was just the SM design rehashed with a plain bezel, not so. It is noticeably thinner, the caseback has a very different profile and the crystals are totally different in curvature. The dial area may be similar or even identical but the RM design looks less heavy as the rehaut is shallower. I love the curve of the RM crystal, it is a real dead ringer for acrylic and gives no distortion or milky ring. The RM is definitely one that works better on the wrist than pictures would lead you to believe.

They do seem the same lug to lug and the overall width seems identical too, or at least within a fraction of a mm. The supposed 1mm difference may be partly down the the slight bezel overhang, in a similar way to how the FOIS and Trilogy Speedmaster are quoted as different sizes, but it is all in the bezel! The RM is noticeably thinner and snugger to the wrist at circa ~12.5mm vs the SM ~14mm. I didn't expect this and like it a lot. It feels like a military watch, like a slightly bigger WWW or Dynamic Gen 3 in many ways.

The bracelet which is the same on all 3 other than the end links feels least successful on the RM where it does show its size and heft. This is the one most likely to stay on the leather strap IMO. The bracelet works better on the SM as the overall watch thickness disguises the heft more. Below are some comparison pics that hopefully show these points. It was mentioned elsewhere that the RM dial may be browner than the SM or SP. I am not seeing that here but judge for yourself. The light here is very strong and will wash out the dials to grey a little, in normal use they look darker, black almost. The lume seems applied into shallow wells on both, not as obvious as on a sandwich dial but it is definitely not applied straight onto a flat dial as it sits flush or even a little below. Note the caseback profile on the RM is more like that on the Speedmaster, that is to say a double bevel as seen up until the Pro models. The SM design is more organic. The crowns look the same size but is screw down on the SM and not on the RM. The crown on the RM pulls out very easily so it is a good thing that there is water ingress protection on the stem regardless of setting or running status.

To coin a phrase, fail boat? My arse!

stevec14 · Jul 24, 2019

padders
Ok I'll play as I now have all 3 so can so some first hand comparisons. They are rather more different than I previously assumed and all 3 definitely have their own personality. I will ignore the Speemaster for the moment since that has been already discussed at length but the RM has been cruelly over looked to my mind. I had wrongly assumed the RM was just the SM design rehashed with a plain bezel, not so. It is noticeably thinner, the caseback has a very different profile and the crystals are totally different in curvature. The dial area may be similar or even identical but the RM design looks less heavy as the rehaut is shallower. I love the curve of the RM crystal, it is a real dead ringer for acrylic and gives no distortion or milky ring. The RM is definitely one that works better on the wrist than pictures would lead you to believe.

They do seem the same lug to lug and the overall width seems identical too, or at least within a fraction of a mm. The supposed 1mm difference may be partly down the the slight bezel overhang, in a similar way to how the FOIS and Trilogy Speedmaster are quoted as different sizes, but it is all in the bezel! The RM is noticeably thinner and snugger to the wrist at circa ~12.5mm vs the SM ~14mm. I didn't expect this and like it a lot. It feels like a military watch, like a slightly bigger WWW or Dynamic Gen 3 in many ways.

The bracelet which is the same on all 3 other than the end links feels least successful on the RM where it does show its size and heft. This is the one most likely to stay on the leather strap IMO. The bracelet works better on the SM as the overall watch thickness disguises the heft more. Below are some comparison pics that hopefully show these points. It was mentioned elsewhere that the RM dial may be browner than the SM or SP. I am not seeing that here but judge for yourself. The light here is very strong and will wash out the dials to grey a little, in normal use they look darker, black almost. The lume seems applied into shallow wells on both, not as obvious as on a sandwich dial but it is definitely not applied straight onto a flat dial as it sits flush or even a little below. Note the caseback profile on the RM is more like that on the Speedmaster, that is to say a double bevel as seen up until the Pro models. The SM design is more organic. The crowns look the same size but is screw down on the SM and not on the RM. The crown on the RM pulls out very easily so it is a good thing that there is water ingress protection on the stem regardless of setting or running status.

To coin a phrase, fail boat? My arse!

Those are great shots. When I had mine, I always felt the RM looked a little awkward on the bracelet - partly because the lugs went past the end link giving an odd look at certain angles: I far preferred it on strap, but the speedmaster 60th one in brown.

They are a great set of watches, and at current prices pretty good value compared to some offerings.

rainking · Jul 24, 2019

padders
The RM is noticeably thinner and snugger to the wrist at circa ~12.5mm vs the SM ~14mm.

Just curious, is the RM's case actually thinner/different than the SM's? In pics it looks to me like the SM's bezel is what accounts for the extra thickness, but it's hard to tell if that is an accurate assessment just by looking at photos. Either way, thanks for the great comparo and analysis. Just reinforces my feeling that I picked the best of the bunch with the RM. Like you said, that watch is wholly underrated and overlooked. In real life and on my wrist, it blows my mind. And I actually love the bracelet and have zero problems with the way it fits, looks and feels. The RM is just a stunning design overall.

padders · Jul 24, 2019

This is a good question. The mid case depth looks similar between them but I need to get a calliper on it to check. Give me a day or so and I will do just that, and check the mid case width too as that looks similar. You are right that a lot of the SM extra height is in the bezel, as I mentioned, the rehaut on the SM is at a steeper angle and there is more space between the dial and crystal on the SM seemingly, probably to provide bezel depth. There are also differences in the casebacks too both in shape and probably thickness. The SM is rated to 300m (often overlooked is the fact that the original SM300 was only rated to 200m strangely) and would need a stronger back vs a 60m rated watch so that may have added thickness too. The profile is certainly different.

rainking · Jul 24, 2019

Thanks, great stuff!