how much of a fail boat is the trilogy series?

pIoNeErOfThEnILe

i'm not saying i don't like them, or that i don't want them, but man,...how much of bath are peeps taking with them?

-3500+ doesn't rally translate into LE. they seem to be everywhere, heavily discounted pre-owned and new from a very high opening msrp

i thought there would be more of a deeper market for them, but it seems limited and niche driven...at least for 3500 examples of each.

imo these would have been gobbled up if their pricing wasn't so high.

padders

Here are a couple of pics of the RM on leather. In this case the FOIS 19mm Barena. Regarding the RM lug length, it is more noticeable on the leather strap but still not an issue on my 71/4” wrist. It’s nothing like the LLD, that was uncomfortable overhang city. That said, the lugs are considerably longer than some other designs. I did a comparison pic below against sparkle dial 36mm 166.032 and you can see the RM is way longer so it will feel much bigger on the wrist than some other 36-38mm designs. If you struggle with a short lug 38mm then you may struggle with this but that said, I would surmise that unless you are ultra petite it shouldn’t be too tricky to get a nice fit. These comments will likely apply to the SM and Speed too as they seems similar length but I haven’t confirmed it with callipers as yet.

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!

padders

My previous posts have crystallised my thinking on on these rather. I have now acquired all 3, the latter 2 in full knowledge that they weren't hot property or a massive sales success but instead of letting this put me off I seized the opportunity to get them cheaper. My outlay is around £13.5k for the 3 and I am not remotely unhappy with any of them. I will likely flip one or other on at some point to reduce duplication* but not anytime soon. If Omega has released them at, say £4K for the RM, £4.5k for the SM and £5k for the Speed then I think they would have flown out the door and scarcity would have pushed them over list price pretty quickly, as it is they dropped and are clawing back once scarcity kicks in. Most of us care about money but I am not a flip chaser like a few vocal members on here (often to be found in the Buzz Butt threads) so I can stomach the fact these may not all skyrocket, I like them for what they are, and what they are is very good.

*ironically, having an Ed White and various dive Omegas it is the possibly the RM which stands most chance of being a permanent resident at present.

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!

F FlyingSnoopy

If I may add...
I own the speedmaster and the railmaster of the three.
I find that the bracelet, especially with the rm, is a complete misfit as it is way too thick for the case and the aura of the watch.
Granted, the bracelet is very well executed and the quality is as it should be. However, in my eyes, it is too thick.
For these two watches I would have preferred a more vintage style and much thinner as the trilogy is homage to the original watches.
Having said that, cudos to omega for giving us three modern/vintage watches.
And of the three, in my opinion again the rm will prove to be the more “collectible” one, maybe not in monetary means, but because it pays a bit of an homage to the real military issued watches that omega made...
Cheers

padders

Here are a couple of pics of the RM on leather. In this case the FOIS 19mm Barena. Regarding the RM lug length, it is more noticeable on the leather strap but still not an issue on my 71/4” wrist. It’s nothing like the LLD, that was uncomfortable overhang city. That said, the lugs are considerably longer than some other designs. I did a comparison pic below against sparkle dial 36mm 166.032 and you can see the RM is way longer so it will feel much bigger on the wrist than some other 36-38mm designs. If you struggle with a short lug 38mm then you may struggle with this but that said, I would surmise that unless you are ultra petite it shouldn’t be too tricky to get a nice fit. These comments will likely apply to the SM and Speed too as they seems similar length but I haven’t confirmed it with callipers as yet.

padders

Not sure I see what you mean? The strap fits the lugs perfectly as far as I can see, its 19mm.

padders

Ah right, just chucked it on for the pic. It fits just fine. It hit 38deg in parts of the UK today, I put it on v loose for the pics.

Poday

At least when it comes to the speedmaster and Seamaster, omega seems to have sold every unit they made.

rominvicta

Not exactly. There are still Speedmasters available here and there.