Hi All,
First time poster and non experienced in finer watches with a question. I know this is an Omega forum, and that is what I have been generally looking at, but I have a question. Ive been looking at Seamaster300s, usually around year 2000 or so. they are running around $2000 on Ebay atm. Ive also taken a look at the Breitling Super Ocean 42's. They are about the same price, basically the same layout, both chronometers. I realize the Omega is a Chronograph. In anyone's honest opinion, is there much of a difference in value, reliability, maintenance cost, among other things? I'm considering both and like both, just trying to get more info on them. I also understand this is a totally opinionated question, so please feel free to let me know your feelings on both.
Thanks
jim

 

Ultimately, it boils down to which you prefer and which you feel looks and feels better on your wrist.

 

I've had both and I'd pick the omega.

 

You should post photos because your post is unclear. I think there are many variations of SM300, and maybe the same is true of the Breitling, I don't know.

 

Examples
Used Omega or New Brietling.

 

I’ve seen other variants of the SuperOcean that I prefer. Of the two pics you’ve posted, I’d pick the Omega all day long, but it’s ultimately your choice. For some reason everyone is chasing pie pan Connies at the moment and I’m (largely) immune to the appeal. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

Both are good watches and should be reliable, easy to maintain and proud to have on the wrist.

 

I'm curious why you are interested in the SMP Chronograph instead of the traditional SMP Bond watch. That would seem to be a more apt comparison to the Breitling. For me, the SMP chronograph is too busy and bulky.

 

Like Dan said, that Seamaster got some bulk. The stainless version on it's bracelet is one heavy beast clanking around on your wrist.

 

Well, I boat and plan on doing some extended sailing and thought the chronograph might come in useful. I have been looking at the bonds versions also, especially wih the wave face. I do like that also . What are others thoughts?

 

Over the two I would like the breitling. As others have said too many complications looks too busy. I’m sure it’s a very nice watch. I really do like the modern seamasters, I have been working on obtaining one but it isn’t going as smoothly as I had expected. Anyway that’s the thing with watches, taste comes into play. Damn now the more I look at that breitling the more I appreciate it.

 

I'm sincerely always interested to hear chronograph use cases, primarily because I have quite a few of them and virtually never have a good excuse to use the stopwatch functions. How do you think you might use it while sailing?

 

It would be quite useful in figuring out your position while dead reckoning. A useful thing to have, although a basic watch would work. The chronograph would make it much easier. Also, if you have a loss of electric equipment while out at sea, speed and precise time is invaluable. Another reason for the chronometer. Not absolutely necessary, but neither is a sextant, sure is fun to use.

 

Sorry for the silly question, pie pan connie = over size constellation?

 

Go with what turns you on but Omega does it for me

 

Ah, no - “pie pan” refers to the pie pan shape inside the dial. It's the classic Constellation design from the 1950s, but the vast majority are a dressy c.35mm case diameter. Here’s one @bgrisso sold a couple of years ago:



The oversize Connies (37?mm) are the ones for the Asian market and much rarer. You’ll find many a thread on Constellations here! I’m a devotee of the C-case style myself: