Omega Seamaster Trilogy 300 "1957" Review - Ref. 234.10.39.20.01.001 - Is it a Keeper?

Posts
1,438
Likes
2,212
Thanks for the vids, OP.

It wasn't for me, but I can see why it's so beloved by some collectors. It's certainly a terrific opportunity for those looking for an original that they can actually wear. I loved lots about mine, but ultimately failed to get on with it. So it goes.
 
Posts
729
Likes
860
I had it for two year and sold it. It’s just too shiny for a vintage retro watch for my taste.
 
Posts
1,579
Likes
15,222
I'm a big fan of the '57 trilogy pieces, and have the Railmaster on my list of watches I'm looking for, along with the LE 1948 Seamaster.

But it's your watch, not mine. What anyone but you thinks is all that matters, and if you're going to base a watch purchase on what other people think, you are missing the point, IMO. It's a great watch.
 
Posts
253
Likes
444
I'm a big fan of the '57 trilogy pieces, and have the Railmaster on my list of watches I'm looking for, along with the LE 1948 Seamaster.

But it's your watch, not mine. What anyone but you thinks is all that matters, and if you're going to base a watch purchase on what other people think, you are missing the point, IMO. It's a great watch.
Same here, I’m big fan of ‘57 trilogy as well. I started with Speedmaster, which is a beautiful piece. Then I bought a Seamaster - even nicer one! And having two from three, I decided to buy the Railmaster just to complete the trio. Oh man I couldn’t be more wrong about the Railmaster. I truly consider Railmaster as a most beautiful hence most underrated from the 1957 trilogy!
 
Posts
253
Likes
444
But is it a good choice?
You spend your money so don’t look around what others say but buy what you like. You will take it on every morning, you will wound the watch every other day. Don’t care about others, care about what you like!
 
Posts
258
Likes
361
Personally, I think it's a fantastic piece. You get the looks of a vintage watch, but all the benefits of a new one. For me, I love vintage watches, so I wonder if the watch being new and not actually from 1957 might detract a little from the appeal. I like the fact that a true vintage watch has survived 30, 40, 60 years or whatever and that someone was wearing the watch at the same time in history as say, when Castro took over Cuba, when JFK was president or the Vietnam was on.
 
Posts
8,096
Likes
58,221
My thought process when this trilogy was introduced…..

no way could I ever afford a vintage 57 Speedmaster or Seamaster in acceptable condition, that ship had sailed.

I love both. Wear them often.
 
Posts
4,671
Likes
17,676
My thought process when this trilogy was introduced…..

no way could I ever afford a vintage 57 Speedmaster or Seamaster in acceptable condition, that ship had sailed.

I love both. Wear them often.

100% the Seamaster is a keeper for me - and I had the same logic. My only regret is I was torn for the Railmaster which is also a lovely watch.
.
 
Posts
1,645
Likes
5,172
If you have any doubts and want to consider a trade, PM me - I've been wanting one of these for a while now.
 
Posts
1
Likes
2
100% the Seamaster is a keeper for me - and I had the same logic. My only regret is I was torn for the Railmaster which is also a lovely watch.
.
Hi.
The same for me.
I have wanted a Railmaster for 20 years, but the "real" edition is beyond my reach, so I saw the new edition as affordable.
And I enjoy it in its proper environment every day now.

 
Posts
41
Likes
104
Keep! The trilogy watches are really special imo. I have the Speedmaster and it's never failed to bring a smile to my face whenever I have it on my wrist. I've wanted to pick up the Seamster and Railmaster over the years but home renovations have taken priority... Maybe someday...
 
Posts
1,447
Likes
7,964
For the same money, I went for an original.
Found it here on OF
 
Posts
1,589
Likes
5,097
For the same money, I went for an original.
Found it here on OF
Not bad! Must have been a good deal 👍