Possible new 300m spotted on Daniel Craig

Posts
1,426
Likes
2,193
I can’t see there being a thinner case unless they use a solid back. I’ve seen nothing to suggest the 8806 is any thinner than the 8800. The date wheel is recessed, not stuck on top. Maybe it is thinner but I don’t think so.

I had the Trilogy SMP and it was thinner (with solid case). IIRC it had the 8806 and the one in mine was noticeably loud. On balance I preferred other iterations of the design and ended up grabbing the CW "inspired by" take on the big triangle.

A thinner, scaled-down SMP 300 is likely to lose some presence also -- I guess it might make sense as a catalogue addition a la BB54 but my guess is that the current SMP 300m is a very steady seller for Omega, and that a revamped version of the mainstay appears only once sales data indicates that a replacement is required. Still feels like the PO is aimed at a different market.
 
Posts
2,519
Likes
4,727
I had the Trilogy SMP and it was thinner (with solid case). IIRC it had the 8806 and the one in mine was noticeably loud. On balance I preferred other iterations of the design and ended up grabbing the CW "inspired by" take on the big triangle.

A thinner, scaled-down SMP 300 is likely to lose some presence also -- I guess it might make sense as a catalogue addition a la BB54 but my guess is that the current SMP 300m is a very steady seller for Omega, and that a revamped version of the mainstay appears only once sales data indicates that a replacement is required. Still feels like the PO is aimed at a different market.

The SM300 Trilogy is 14.2mm thick, thicker than the SMP. However, it has a higher domed crystal and a ~2mm shorter lug to lug so it doesn't perhaps feel as thick (and it isn't as bulky).

Regarding the PO, the 39.5mm version is only 14.2mm thick, which man, those proportions are nearly perfect for a 600M Diver.
 
Posts
69
Likes
66
The SM300 Trilogy is 14.2mm thick, thicker than the SMP. However, it has a higher domed crystal and a ~2mm shorter lug to lug so it doesn't perhaps feel as thick (and it isn't as bulky).

Regarding the PO, the 39.5mm version is only 14.2mm thick, which man, those proportions are nearly perfect for a 600M Diver.

The 39.5 PO is very close to being perfect. I wear mine more than anything else. The thickness isn’t that bad, it actually is the proportions that aren’t quite there. 0.5 mm thinner, and 1 mm longer lugs, and we have something.

I think the size of the 39.5 PO is great, but proportions are off. I think the proportions of the Diver 300m are great, but the size is too big. If that makes sense 😀.
 
Posts
2,519
Likes
4,727
The 39.5 PO is very close to being perfect. I wear mine more than anything else. The thickness isn’t that bad, it actually is the proportions that aren’t quite there. 0.5 mm thinner, and 1 mm longer lugs, and we have something.

I think the size of the 39.5 PO is great, but proportions are off. I think the proportions of the Diver 300m are great, but the size is too big. If that makes sense 😀.

47-48mm lug-to-lug is pretty much ideal, the shorter L2L on the PO does make it a bit puck-like. As far as thi(n)ckess, if Omega made a 600m Diver at sub 14mm that'd be something else.
 
Posts
343
Likes
327
I'd really like Omega to downsize the SMP to 40mm and make it thinner. But my bank account prefers they don't. Unless that happens I will stay content with my 41mm 2220.80 SMP, which I have on my wrist as I write this.
 
Posts
8
Likes
4
On TRF thread, someone is claiming they met a senior Omega executive at an OB who confirmed that the new Diver 300 is 39mm in size.
 
Posts
343
Likes
327
A AlyRba
On TRF thread, someone is claiming they met a senior Omega executive at an OB who confirmed that the new Diver 300 is 39mm in size.

I need another watch like I need a hole in my head. But a 39mm SMP will force me to buy another. Especially if they make one in the Bond 60th Anniversary blue colorway.
 
Posts
286
Likes
758
A AlyRba
On TRF thread, someone is claiming they met a senior Omega executive at an OB who confirmed that the new Diver 300 is 39mm in size.

Fingers crossed, but I'll wait for something a bit more official than a guy on a forum haha.
 
Posts
343
Likes
327
According to the TRF thread, it's being reported black only for now. Apparently Omega is stealing from Tudor's playbook and is slow playing the release of other colors.
Edited:
 
Posts
343
Likes
327
Google fu indicates:

First Gen SMP: 11.5 mm
Second Gen SMP: Unchanged?
Third Gen SMPc: 12.8 mm (+11%)
Fourth Gen SMD: 13.6 mm (+18%)

EDIT: I found some references for the first gen that list it at 11.7 mm or 12 mm, but I measured mine with calipers and it corroborated the 11.5 mm source.

I own all these models and here's what I get on my digital calipers (which measures to the 100th of a mm, but I've rounded up or down to the nearest 10th). This is measured from the caseback to the middle of the crystal.

11.2mm - 2541.80 SMP, 1538 quartz movement (Bond wore in GoldenEye)
11.7mm - 2531.80 SMP, 1120 movement (Bond wore in Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is not Enough, and Die Another Day)
12.5mm - 2220.80 SMP, 2500D movement (Bond wore in Casino Royale)*
12.9mm - No wave dial, ceramic bezel SMP, 2500D movement
13.7mm - Current gen wave dial 42mm SMP with ceramic bezel, 8800 movement


*My 2220.80 has the 2500D movement which was used at the very end of the 2220.80 run (circa 2012). Most 2220.80 SMP's have the 2 level co-axial escapement 2500C movement. The 2500D had a three level co-axial escapement so it is slightly thicker than the 2500A, 2500B, and 2500C (all two level co-axials). So I think the 2500C 2220.80's were probably 12.2mm or 12.3mm thick. They were definitely thicker than the 1120 movement 2531.80's.

There can be some subjectivity in the measurements, but this gives a pretty clear indication of how the SMP has grown thicker over the different generations.
Edited:
 
Posts
286
Likes
758
According to the TRF thread, it's being reported black only for now. Apparently Omega is stealing from Tudor's playbook and is slow playing the release of other colors.

This gives some additional weight to the theories that what Craig was wearing is in fact the fourth gen SMP, and not a special edition. If so, that's surprising but very welcome. I was pretty sure it would be some kind of special edition, because I just didn't think they'd go back to a first gen style all white print wave dial for a mainline release. But if they have, absolutely love that. Going a bit more historic would be another steal from Tudor's playbook I reckon. 😜

I own all these models and here's what I get on my digital calipers (which measures to the 100th of a mm, but I've rounded up or down to the nearest 10th). This is measured from the caseback to the middle of the crystal.

11.2mm - 2541.80 SMP, 1538 quartz movement (Bond wore in GoldenEye)
11.7mm - 2531.80 SMP, 1120 movement (Bond wore in Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is not Enough, and Die Another Day)
12.5mm - 2220.80 SMP, 2500D movement (Bond wore in Casino Royale)*
12.9mm - No wave dial, ceramic bezel SMP, 2500D movement
13.7mm - Current gen wave dial 42mm SMP with ceramic bezel, 8800 movement


*My 2220.80 has the 2500D movement which was used at the very end of the 2220.80 run (circa 2012). Most 2220.80 SMP's have the 2 level co-axial escapement 2500C movement. The 2500D had a three level co-axial escapement so it is slightly thicker than the 2500A, 2500B, and 2500C (all two level co-axials). So I think the 2500C 2220.80's were probably 12.2mm or 12.3mm thick. They were definitely thicker than the 1120 movement 2531.80's.

There can be some subjectivity in the measurements, but this gives a pretty clear indication of how the SMP has grown thicker over the different generations.

Thanks for this. Agree that when dealing with sub 1 mm, it becomes difficult to get the measurements bang on. Omega quote the thickness of the third gen as 13.1 mm (Not sure where I got 12.8 from earlier, probably a third party source) and the fourth gen as 13.6 mm, but below that it becomes subjective.

I re-measured my 2541.80 just now and I once again got 11.5 mm. When I measured it closer to the edge, I did get 11.2 mm. Is it possible you didn't measure at the centre of the watch, bearing in mind that the crystal is very slightly domed? This is pretty academic, but if you really are getting a difference between your 2541.80 and your 2531.80, I'd be quite curious where that is. Does one have a thicker caseback perhaps?
 
Posts
343
Likes
327
This gives some additional weight to the theories that what Craig was wearing is in fact the fourth gen SMP, and not a special edition. If so, that's surprising but very welcome. I was pretty sure it would be some kind of special edition, because I just didn't think they'd go back to a first gen style all white print wave dial for a mainline release. But if they have, absolutely love that. Going a bit more historic would be another steal from Tudor's playbook I reckon. 😜



Thanks for this. Agree that when dealing with sub 1 mm, it becomes difficult to get the measurements bang on. Omega quote the thickness of the third gen as 13.1 mm (Not sure where I got 12.8 from earlier, probably a third party source) and the fourth gen as 13.6 mm, but below that it becomes subjective.

I re-measured my 2541.80 just now and I once again got 11.5 mm. When I measured it closer to the edge, I did get 11.2 mm. Is it possible you didn't measure at the centre of the watch, bearing in mind that the crystal is very slightly domed? This is pretty academic, but if you really are getting a difference between your 2541.80 and your 2531.80, I'd be quite curious where that is. Does one have a thicker caseback perhaps?

I remeasured everything and I must have been coming up just short of the center of the crystal. Add 0.1mm to everything except the quartz Goldeneye, which was off by 0.2mm. So I measure the Goldeneye at 11.4mm. I know for absolute certainty the 2541.80 (quartz Goldeneye) and the 2531.80 (automatic) do not have the same thickness. The 2531.80 is thicker by 0.4mm.

Here's everything in one place:

11.4mm - 2541.80 SMP, 1538 quartz movement (Bond wore in GoldenEye)
11.8mm - 2531.80 SMP, 1120 movement (Bond wore in Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is not Enough, and Die Another Day)
12.6mm - 2220.80 SMP, 2500D movement (Bond wore in Casino Royale)*
13.0mm - No wave dial, ceramic bezel SMP, 2500D movement
13.8mm - Current gen wave dial 42mm SMP with ceramic bezel, 8800 movement
 
Posts
286
Likes
758
I remeasured everything and I must have been coming up just short of the center of the crystal. Add 0.1mm to everything except the quartz Goldeneye, which was off by 0.2mm. So I measure the Goldeneye at 11.4mm. I know for absolute certainty the 2541.80 (quartz Goldeneye) and the 2531.80 (automatic) do not have the same thickness. The 2531.80 is thicker by 0.4mm.

Here's everything in one place:

11.4mm - 2541.80 SMP, 1538 quartz movement (Bond wore in GoldenEye)
11.8mm - 2531.80 SMP, 1120 movement (Bond wore in Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is not Enough, and Die Another Day)
12.6mm - 2220.80 SMP, 2500D movement (Bond wore in Casino Royale)*
13.0mm - No wave dial, ceramic bezel SMP, 2500D movement
13.8mm - Current gen wave dial 42mm SMP with ceramic bezel, 8800 movement

Nice one, thanks. That makes a bit more sense.

Can you tell by eye what is contributing to the thickness difference on the quartz vs mechanical first gen references? I'm curious if it's a thicker caseback, or the case itself is thicker. I imagine the bezel and crystal would be identical.
 
Posts
1,636
Likes
1,608
According to the TRF thread, it's being reported black only for now. Apparently Omega is stealing from Tudor's playbook and is slow playing the release of other colors.

Would love this to be true, especially if they made the SeaWeed green no date, and 40mm. Would obviously have to see how the black variant wore.

Not tried on the 60th Bond, but have seen it in a local ADs window and was impressed visually (& I prefer the newer ceramic waves)
 
Posts
9,536
Likes
15,041
Nice one, thanks. That makes a bit more sense.

Can you tell by eye what is contributing to the thickness difference on the quartz vs mechanical first gen references? I'm curious if it's a thicker caseback, or the case itself is thicker. I imagine the bezel and crystal would be identical.
It’s the profile of the caseback which is flatter on the quartz and possibly the mid case too.
 
Posts
343
Likes
327
Nice one, thanks. That makes a bit more sense.

Can you tell by eye what is contributing to the thickness difference on the quartz vs mechanical first gen references? I'm curious if it's a thicker caseback, or the case itself is thicker. I imagine the bezel and crystal would be identical.

I just looked at the two side-by-side. I don't see anything that jumps out as different. But the calipers says they are 0.4mm different. I have a quartz Peter Blake and the automatic version as well and get the same measurements.
 
Posts
60
Likes
38
This gives some additional weight to the theories that what Craig was wearing is in fact the fourth gen SMP, and not a special edition. If so, that's surprising but very welcome. I was pretty sure it would be some kind of special edition, because I just didn't think they'd go back to a first gen style all white print wave dial for a mainline release. But if they have, absolutely love that. Going a bit more historic would be another steal from Tudor's playbook I reckon. 😜


I can't imagine that Daniel Craig's Seamaster is a new generation.
I see two reasons for this:

1. the watch looks almost exactly like the NTTD and the 60th Anniversary JB. Why would Omega use a design for a completely new generation that has been around for several years? There are simply too few changes for a new generation.

2. many people don't like the mesh bracelet because it doesn't fit properly. Omega will certainly not bring out a new generation with a bracelet that many people don't like because it simply doesn't fit properly. All other generations of the Seamaster had the classic Pierce Brosnan bracelet. It was the distinguishing feature of the Seamaster alongside the helium valve, the skeletonized hands and the wave pattern on the dial. I can't imagine Omega simply replacing it with a completely different bracelet. And if Omega does, then not with a mesh strap.

So I'm pretty sure that the Seamaster worn by Daniel Craig is another model variant alongside the NTTD and the 60th Anniversary JB. A slightly different dial that is otherwise very similar or identical to these two watch models.
Edited:
 
Posts
286
Likes
758
M Ofan
I can't imagine that Daniel Craig's Seamaster is a new generation.
I see two reasons for this:

1. the watch looks almost exactly like the NTTD and the 60th Anniversary JB. Why would Omega use a design for a completely new generation that has been around for several years? There are simply too few changes for a new generation.

2. many people don't like the mesh bracelet because it doesn't fit properly. Omega will certainly not bring out a new generation with a bracelet that many people don't like because it simply doesn't fit properly. All other generations of the Seamaster had the classic Pierce Brosnan bracelet. It was the distinguishing feature of the Seamaster alongside the helium valve, the skeletonized hands and the wave pattern on the dial. I can't imagine Omega simply replacing it with a completely different bracelet. And if Omega does, then not with a mesh strap.

So I'm pretty sure that the Seamaster worn by Daniel Craig is another model variant alongside the NTTD and the 60th Anniversary JB. A slightly different dial that is otherwise very similar or identical to these two watch models.

I tend to feel the same way. I'm absolutely convinced the mesh strap isn't the new main strap either way, it will only ever be an option outside of special editions. It's just too niche, they'd kill their sales if they didn't offer a proper bracelet.
 
Posts
2,519
Likes
4,727
I remeasured everything and I must have been coming up just short of the center of the crystal. Add 0.1mm to everything except the quartz Goldeneye, which was off by 0.2mm. So I measure the Goldeneye at 11.4mm. I know for absolute certainty the 2541.80 (quartz Goldeneye) and the 2531.80 (automatic) do not have the same thickness. The 2531.80 is thicker by 0.4mm.

Here's everything in one place:

11.4mm - 2541.80 SMP, 1538 quartz movement (Bond wore in GoldenEye)
11.8mm - 2531.80 SMP, 1120 movement (Bond wore in Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is not Enough, and Die Another Day)
12.6mm - 2220.80 SMP, 2500D movement (Bond wore in Casino Royale)*
13.0mm - No wave dial, ceramic bezel SMP, 2500D movement
13.8mm - Current gen wave dial 42mm SMP with ceramic bezel, 8800 movement

Interesting.I know the bezel-caseback measurement is difficult to obtain because the caseback on so many of these is sloped, but I'm curious how much the crystal accounts for the height in many of these cases, because afaik, these all have slightly different crystals.
 
Posts
60
Likes
38
The Seamaster series is the best-selling/most popular model alongside the Speedmaster Moonwatch.

Omega would not present the new generation of the Seamaster (the Bond watch par excellence) at the Olympic Games on Daniel Craig's arm "by chance". You can do that if it's another color variant of a Moonwatch or Seamaster, but it's not worthy of such an introduction/presentation of a new watch generation of Omega's top sellers (as much as I like Daniel Craig).

Omega will introduce/present the new generation Seamaster on the wrist of the new James Bond actor in the new James Bond movie. They certainly wouldn't miss this opportunity! Daniel Craig is no longer James Bond! You mustn't forget that.

Next year it will most likely be decided who the new James Bond actor will be and shortly after that the shooting of the new JB movie will start. The new JB movie is behind schedule. Therefore, I am sure that Omega will present the new Seamaster in a movie/watch trailer at the end of next year (when the shooting of the new JB movie has started). Just like with the Seamaster NTTD. And to bridge the time until then, Omega is using Daniel Craig to introduce another Seamaster variant alongside the NTTD and 60th Anniversary JB (all with mesh bracelet).