- Posts
- 6,499
- Likes
- 26,440
Scarecrow Boat
··Burt Macklin, FBI
…to military pilots only (winged aviator/pilot/navigator). If you aren’t any of those, good luck getting one.
Possible new 300m spotted on Daniel Craig
…to military pilots only (winged aviator/pilot/navigator). If you aren’t any of those, good luck getting one.
- Posts
- 5,120
- Likes
- 23,328
YY77
·Why wouldn't there be a 55th Snoopy - is there a precedent set?
- Posts
- 1,632
- Likes
- 2,383
Annapolis
·I think---like some others on this forum---I'm settling into this release. (The black one---I still think the gray one is a mess.)
I'm disappointed that Omega didn't downsize this watch to a more manageable 40mm. And the return to aluminum (as opposed to, say, a matte ceramic) is a strange move, but it's not unpleasing. I'm not sure how I feel about the mesh bracelet as I've never had a chance to try one, but I don't mind the look. At least it has a taper? And a clasp that won't malfunction?
But if I can acknowledge that Omega was unlikely to produce a watch that ticked off my entire wish-list and see this for what it is, it's really a pretty solid offering. I wanted a no-date 300m Pro. I disliked the laser-cut wave dial and much prefer this newer (Bond 60th style) version. It's a good evolution of the current gen. The price is punchy, but once availability stabilizes, assuming the watch market remains fairly stagnant, I'm guessing there will be discounts or extras for the hard bargainers among us.
Guess I'd put it this way: Omega now offers a newer-tech watch that, for me, makes a compelling alternative to early-2000s-era Rolex Submariners (14060 and 14060M), which, with a little hunting and haggling, can be found for around or just above the same price. If I were looking for a luxury no-date, aluminum bezel diver from a marquee brand and had a pick between a well-kept and RSC-serviced 14060M and and this new Omega at the same price, I'd probably pick this watch, or would at least agonize over the decision a bit. (And then come to my senses and get a Fifty Fathoms instead.)
Not sure yet whether I want to part with my Rio Seamaster (3rd gen), which fits me like a well-tailored suit. But I'm not ruling that out---need to see one of these in the metal and try it on.
I'm disappointed that Omega didn't downsize this watch to a more manageable 40mm. And the return to aluminum (as opposed to, say, a matte ceramic) is a strange move, but it's not unpleasing. I'm not sure how I feel about the mesh bracelet as I've never had a chance to try one, but I don't mind the look. At least it has a taper? And a clasp that won't malfunction?
But if I can acknowledge that Omega was unlikely to produce a watch that ticked off my entire wish-list and see this for what it is, it's really a pretty solid offering. I wanted a no-date 300m Pro. I disliked the laser-cut wave dial and much prefer this newer (Bond 60th style) version. It's a good evolution of the current gen. The price is punchy, but once availability stabilizes, assuming the watch market remains fairly stagnant, I'm guessing there will be discounts or extras for the hard bargainers among us.
Guess I'd put it this way: Omega now offers a newer-tech watch that, for me, makes a compelling alternative to early-2000s-era Rolex Submariners (14060 and 14060M), which, with a little hunting and haggling, can be found for around or just above the same price. If I were looking for a luxury no-date, aluminum bezel diver from a marquee brand and had a pick between a well-kept and RSC-serviced 14060M and and this new Omega at the same price, I'd probably pick this watch, or would at least agonize over the decision a bit. (And then come to my senses and get a Fifty Fathoms instead.)
Not sure yet whether I want to part with my Rio Seamaster (3rd gen), which fits me like a well-tailored suit. But I'm not ruling that out---need to see one of these in the metal and try it on.
- Posts
- 2,420
- Likes
- 2,548
texasmade
·Why wouldn't there be a 55th Snoopy - is there a precedent set?
- Posts
- 2,854
- Likes
- 5,311
ErichPryde
·
- Posts
- 2,854
- Likes
- 5,311
ErichPryde
·Here is my take on this watch: I love it for almost every reason other people are criticizing it. It's not the flagship launch of a new generation and it isn't smaller, but it is essentially the most elegant 42mm SMP to-date that captures the essence of being an SMP in a lot of ways.
That is, it honestly makes a lot of sense as a end of generation review... and HOPEFULLY a preview of the next gen as well.
The only thing I do not like about it is that it only comes on a Milanese bracelet, but I'm not a huge fan of the no-taper Bond bracelet either... and I think any sort of a serious bracelet update would be for the next gen.
If Omega can continue to make the heritage diver in the ~40mm range capturing the general concept of the '50s/60s/70s style, and they can keep making the SMP line <~40mm capturing the essence of the '90s-20s, their design language might make sense two decades from now.
One can hope.
That is, it honestly makes a lot of sense as a end of generation review... and HOPEFULLY a preview of the next gen as well.
The only thing I do not like about it is that it only comes on a Milanese bracelet, but I'm not a huge fan of the no-taper Bond bracelet either... and I think any sort of a serious bracelet update would be for the next gen.
If Omega can continue to make the heritage diver in the ~40mm range capturing the general concept of the '50s/60s/70s style, and they can keep making the SMP line <~40mm capturing the essence of the '90s-20s, their design language might make sense two decades from now.
One can hope.
- Posts
- 307
- Likes
- 263
eldiano84
·Why does everyone want a smaller watch? Anything below 40 mm and it feels extra small
- Posts
- 269
- Likes
- 407
nlogax
·Why does everyone want a smaller watch? Anything below 40 mm and it feels extra small
The pinnacle of watch design 1950s through 1970s was for human sized, fairly modest diameters <= 40mm, with perfectly reasonable exceptions where the movement (chronographs) or usage (pilots, divers) demanded it. A lot of us prefer those vintage sizes because they're simply more wearable, more discreet, more balanced etc. They're also more honest and true to form meets function: because the movement doesnt need the extra case sizing, nor are we taking these watches flying or diving where massive dials can be helpful.
Of course "human size" varies and if you're 6 foot with massive forearms, firstly: lucky you, secondly: a large diameter dial (equally a large dial aperture or long lug-lug) might you suit well. Alternatively if you're average height, skinny and still want to wear a massive GShock, perfectly fine, there's no rules.
Edited:
- Posts
- 427
- Likes
- 982
Jakeys
·Most watches (of all types) got waaaaaay too big in the last 10-20 years: big shiny dinner plates that shout "look at me" and clumsily overhang the wrist and stand way too high off of it.
The pinnacle of watch design 1950s through 1970s was for human sized, fairly modest diameters <= 40mm, with perfectly reasonable exceptions where the movement (chronographs) or usage (pilots, divers) demanded it. A lot of us prefer those vintage sizes because they're simply more wearable, more discreet, more balanced etc. They're also more honest and true to form meets function: because the movement doesnt need the extra case sizing, nor are we taking these watches flying or diving where massive dials can be helpful.
Of course "human size" varies and if you're 6 foot with massive forearms, firstly: lucky you, secondly: a large diameter dial (equally a large dial aperture or long lug-lug) might you suit well. Alternatively if you're average height, skinny and still want to wear a massive GShock, perfectly fine, there's no rules.
Agreed. When I first got into watches, big watches were super trendy and 40 mm seemed conservative. I've since learned a lot more about watches and the history of them, and I now own and regularly wear a 36 mm. The dial is about the same size on it as my 41 mm Seamaster, so they wear about as well as each other on my 7.1" wrist.
Funnily enough, I once commented on a YouTube video where a reviewer referred to the possibility of a 39 mm Seamaster as "mid size". I pointed out that mid size Seamasters were 36 mm, and got attacked in the comments that I was mistaken, 39 mm was indeed mid size, and 36 mm is only a women's size. Try telling that to the Explorer owners. 😜
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 33
o.mega.lover
·Why does everyone want a smaller watch? Anything below 40 mm and it feels extra small
- Posts
- 871
- Likes
- 2,291
bsowers34
·Personally it's a hard pass on both. The milanese bracelet doesn't fit my wrist and it's nothing groundbreaking with these. I like the vintage vibe and the aluminium/brushed bezels, but it seems they're charging more for less. As good as Omega has done with the Speedmaster line this year, seems they phoned it in with the Seamasters. They are somewhat uninspiring.
To each their own, but if I was looking for something like this, would buy a vintage 90s /early 00s one, get a service done by a local watchmaker, then buy a staib bracelet with better adjustment with a few thousand left over.
- Posts
- 9,808
- Likes
- 15,446
- Posts
- 30,503
- Likes
- 36,093
dsio
··Ash @ ΩFOmega has used this on others as well - this is a different colour...
That was before refinishing - this is after...
The finish on this new one looks quite rough so not sure how easily this would be refinished.
- Posts
- 1,632
- Likes
- 2,383
Annapolis
·Why does everyone want a smaller watch? Anything below 40 mm and it feels extra small
I don’t think everyone does. Just some of us. And I’d be just as happy to have a smaller option, rather than an exclusively smaller line.
My daily wear is a 43mm watch that’s all dial—I’m not doctrinaire about this. But I will say, once you get used to wearing a 36-38mm watch, switching back to something over 40mm starts to feel a little clown-shoes silly.
Maybe the point is: watches aren’t one-size-fits-all any more than shoes or shirts or eyeglasses. It’d be nice to have options in the SM pro line as we do with the ATs.
- Posts
- 269
- Likes
- 407
nlogax
·All agreeable stuff, and perhaps I should qualify that while I might find that dinner plate watches dont suit my scrawny wrists, they can work fine for other folks. I also occasionally bust out the GShocks and diving Seikos at ~45mm - and because they tend to have smaller dial sizes and shorter lug-lug than the case diameter would suggest, they look just fine.
It does seem pretty weird that most watch manufacturers ignore the fact that people come in a range of sizes. Can it really be so difficult or dilutive to create versions at e.g. for a diver 40 / 42mm? Or for a dress watch 36 / 38 mm?
<EDIT> Just reread Annapolis and yeah, I wasn't aware Omega make the AT at 38 / 41mm, so I guess that's good. Then there's Rolex with the Datejust at 31 / 36 / 41mm, so I guess some are doing it (!) Still it's not as common practice as I wish it were.
It does seem pretty weird that most watch manufacturers ignore the fact that people come in a range of sizes. Can it really be so difficult or dilutive to create versions at e.g. for a diver 40 / 42mm? Or for a dress watch 36 / 38 mm?
<EDIT> Just reread Annapolis and yeah, I wasn't aware Omega make the AT at 38 / 41mm, so I guess that's good. Then there's Rolex with the Datejust at 31 / 36 / 41mm, so I guess some are doing it (!) Still it's not as common practice as I wish it were.
Edited:
- Posts
- 81
- Likes
- 77
tjs1295
·Omega does it with the Planet Ocean, and has always made two sizes. Also did it for years with the diver or smp (whatever we’re calling it these days). Keep the current 42, just also offer something smaller.
- Posts
- 1,165
- Likes
- 2,152
josiahg52
·There hasn't been a 40mm SMP since when? You have the 39.5mm SMP PO that stacks against the 43.5mm. A 42mm and 40mm SMP 300 seems like splitting hairs. Make it a 36mm or 38mm to make sense. As an option, I mean. The current SMP 300 is fine by me.
- Posts
- 116
- Likes
- 355
Fickle
·The Aqua Terra also comes in 34 mm and 11.9 mm thick using the 8800 so it seems they could slim the SMP if they choose to.
- Posts
- 1,165
- Likes
- 2,152
- Posts
- 81
- Likes
- 77
tjs1295
·There hasn't been a 40mm SMP since when? You have the 39.5mm SMP PO that stacks against the 43.5mm. A 42mm and 40mm SMP 300 seems like splitting hairs. Make it a 36mm or 38mm to make sense. As an option, I mean. The current SMP 300 is fine by me.
Edited:
Similar threads
- Posts
- 331
- Views
- 80K
- Posts
- 63
- Views
- 23K
- Posts
- 29
- Views
- 4K
