Is the new Planet Ocean GMT a worthy successor to the Rolex GMT?

I'm sorry, your very first post here rather than saying hi or introducing yourself was...

With regards to Rolex finish, it is certainly not at the level of some very high end brands, but in most cases the finish is well executed, and quite complete compared to say Omega watches.

For example, here is a 2892 based watch (Cal. 2500 in this case) - this is similar on all of Omegas watches that use this base caliber, such as 1120, 2500, etc.:



You will notice that the bridges are finished with Cotes de Genève, but under that there is almost zero finishing:



On the dial side there is a bit:



But again not much once all the parts have been removed from the main plate:



Here is a Cal. 3301 - some finishing on the upper plates:



As soon as those are gone, zero finishing:



Speedmaster 1861 dial side - zero finishing:



For the most part, Omega only finishes the very tops of the exposed bridges, and pretty much anything out of sight is not finished at all. Here are some Rolex examples, starting with a vintage Cal. 1215 manual wind:



For a more recent movement, here is the train side of a 3135:



Much more finishing than on the Omegas as you get down to the main plate:



Same on the dial side:





If you look at not just the plates, but the finish of the ratchet wheels, train wheels, etc., the Rolex is quite good when compared to most Omegas. The same is true for a 3035, and even back to the 1575.

If you think the 8500 is super finished, well I have not had one apart yet, but I can tell you the dial side is pretty lacking in the finish department:



As is the train side:



Now neither the Rolex or Omega will meet or exceed the type of finish requirements of the Geneva Seal (they don't finish every surface, or have any anglage, and they use cheap wire springs, etc), but at the mass produced semi-luxury watch level, the Rolex is certainly more completely finished than the Omega in most cases, at least in my experience working on them.

I think Rolex gets a bit of a bad wrap when it comes to finishing, at least when compared to watches of the same level.

Cheers, Al

The stigma is in your head. First post or one thousandth, You come here with caustic comments about modern Omegas and the usual 'Fan Boy' comments like "Rolex is tops" and expect folks to agree with you snide remarks and buy into your notions about watch a watch must be to be professional. If you had come here saying Omega is Tops and Rolex is clownish and asinine , you would have been given the same treatment. You can babble but you don't hear. You think we live strictly for Omega's heritage pieces? We are not as shallow as you, if we were most of would not own several Rolex's as well as many other brands. Rolex is not "Tops' and neither is Omega. You need to grow past the , "My dads car is faster than you dads car" mentality or go find some little boys to play with.

I understand they like this sort of discussion style over at WUS. You may find some like minded people over there if the discussion here isn't to your taste.

Well, after reading three entertaining and informative pages and putting away all the chaff and returning to the OP question, I do think [IMO] the new PO GMT is definitely a worthy successor to the Rolex GMT! 😀