Quality differences between Omega, Rolex, IWC, etc. and boutique top tier watches like Vacheron and Patek

Posts
262
Likes
522
Hi all,

Been enjoying this forum for some time now, and have slowly put together what I think of as a pretty nice little collection of quality watches - an early black dial Omega Dynamic, a really nice Omega 168.022, a Certina DS-2, and a super early seahorse Seiko Lord Marvel. I also recently bought a pretty mint, super classy/cool Omega Deauville for my wife. Within this group, the Deauville seems to have an extra something special to it, tho it is perhaps a little hard to pin down, with the 168.022 not far behind.

Over the last several years, I've had a hankering for something a little "higher end"...specifically, a really nice/clean vintage Rolex, or a classic Vacheron Constantin.

Of course this site, at its core, is devoted to Omega, so asking the following question may be really provocative, but is meant to be clarifying - I truly want to hear what folks have to say. Is a say a Day-date Rolex any better than a upper tier (Connie, Seamaster) Omega? What about the large constellation of other quality Swiss or German watches? Thinking here about Zenith, IWC, vintage Heuer, Certina, UG, etc. If there are real differences, what are they? Within movements, does it really just boil down to chrono certified movement vs. the rest?

This site also has a thread for "high-end" watches - Vacheron, Patek, etc. What really differentiates these?

Does it all boil to branding or is there something more?

I realize this is a provocative post, but I really am curious to see the responses.
 
Posts
11,227
Likes
19,668
If talking quality it’s hard to compare watches from different periods as manufacturing processes are different (some for better, some for worse). As such you can’t compare a vintage Omega to a modern Rolex.
If comparing Morden watches, Omega, Rolex, Zenith, IWC are at the same level.
If comparing vintage, I’d say Heuer and Rolex are a similar level, while Omega was actually a slightly better watch in the 50’s/60’s.
Edited:
 
Posts
5,443
Likes
8,477
It’s common for folks to mistake the price now of a vintage watch to the quality of when it was produced - where price now is often driven by both a level of quality but also popularity. (Limited supply+demand = cost)

There are multiple threads about the quality of different watch marques and where they sit in the overall ranking - there is often general consensus but if you are looking for total agreement then you may be waiting a long time.

If you are searching for that one special vintage watch, as a ‘cut above’, you could do worse than looking to the ‘holy trinity’ of VC, Patek and AP.

These marques are widely recognised for the quality of their components, finish and performance.
 
Posts
2,431
Likes
3,312
Hi all,

Been enjoying this forum for some time now, and have slowly put together what I think of as a pretty nice little collection of quality watches - an early black dial Omega Dynamic, a really nice Omega 168.022, a Certina DS-2, and a super early seahorse Seiko Lord Marvel. I also recently bought a pretty mint, super classy/cool Omega Deauville for my wife. Within this group, the Deauville seems to have an extra something special to it, tho it is perhaps a little hard to pin down, with the 168.022 not far behind.

Over the last several years, I've had a hankering for something a little "higher end"...specifically, a really nice/clean vintage Rolex, or a classic Vacheron Constantin.

Of course this site, at its core, is devoted to Omega, so asking the following question may be really provocative, but is meant to be clarifying - I truly want to hear what folks have to say. Is a say a Day-date Rolex any better than a upper tier (Connie, Seamaster) Omega? What about the large constellation of other quality Swiss or German watches? Thinking here about Zenith, IWC, vintage Heuer, Certina, UG, etc. If there are real differences, what are they? Within movements, does it really just boil down to chrono certified movement vs. the rest?

This site also has a thread for "high-end" watches - Vacheron, Patek, etc. What really differentiates these?

Does it all boil to branding or is there something more?

I realize this is a provocative post, but I really am curious to see the responses.
Lots of questions there, and I can only tackle a few.

“Is a Rolex Day-Date better than a Constellation…” it all depends on the era. In the 50s-60s, the Constellation was arguably “better.” In the 70s-90s, Rolex definitely better. Modern? It’s a wash.

Zenith? IWC? Heuer? For chronographs, all about on par with Omega Speedmaster in the 1960s, and all probably better than the Rolex Daytona. But history has made the 1960s Daytona the winner on the resale market because … well, I don’t really know why. Just because, I guess.

And in all eras, Patek and Vacheron were top tier because they were always more limited production, better finishing, and more hand-finishing.
 
Posts
2,431
Likes
3,312
Lots of questions there, and I can only tackle a few.

“Is a Rolex Day-Date better than a Constellation…” it all depends on the era. In the 50s-60s, the Constellation was arguably “better.” In the 70s-90s, Rolex definitely better. Modern? It’s a wash.

Zenith? IWC? Heuer? For chronographs, all about on par with Omega Speedmaster in the 1960s, and all probably better than the Rolex Daytona. But history has made the 1960s Daytona the winner on the resale market because … well, I don’t really know why. Just because, I guess.

And in all eras, Patek and Vacheron were top tier because they were always more limited production, better finishing, and more hand-finishing.
 
Posts
20,091
Likes
46,750
Impossibly broad and vague questions. What does "better" mean? Certainly there are differences in value and prestige and appearance, which are not trivial things. There are obviously differences between the movements, since they were mostly in-house, but those differences are nuanced, and require lengthy details explanations.

I would suggest spending time viewing and researching the brands and watches that interest you, and with time you will narrow down the ones that appeal to you the most. Then buy what gives you the most pleasure. All of the brands you mentioned made excellent watches. Alternatively, what many of us choose to do is simply to buy representative examples from many different brands so that we can experience them in person.
 
Posts
262
Likes
522
To be more specific, I am talking vintage (this is the vintage, not modern sub-forum).

I have spent hundreds of hours on this forum and am asking a question I've never seen a good answer to.

With respect, I don't think these are vague questions at all. I am not talking about "pleasure" or "popularity" or "limited production" or "prestige" or "appearance". I'm talking about physical quality...the nuanced physical differences. People often refer to hand finishing...but that is virtually meaningless (a few minutes of polishing with a cloth?).

Better metal, parts matching, hand assembly vs machine...what? Is it expressed mostly on the case/dial or movement? Or is this simply a matter of marketing and branding at the end of the day?
 
Posts
5,443
Likes
8,477
People often refer to hand finishing...but that is virtually meaningless (a few minutes of polishing with a cloth?).

Better metal, parts matching, hand assembly vs machine...what? Is it expressed mostly on the case/dial or movement? Or is this simply a matter of marketing and branding at the end of the day?

Most luxury goods are beset by the vagaries of their marketing strategy but actual quality can also play its part.

Hand finishing, and the extent to which it is carried out on high-end watches, is not about a bloke with a cloth.
Its about the attention to every detail of the movement.

Look up 'anglage' or 'cote de geneve' for VC or Patek and you will see the difference to say a vintage Omega or any other mass-produced quality watch movement.

I think Omega movements, with their snailing are great to look at (so much so that I used to have a framed photo of one on my wall) but the high end movements are things of real beauty.
 
Posts
20,091
Likes
46,750
With respect, I don't think these are vague questions at all. I am not talking about "pleasure" or "popularity" or "limited production" or "prestige" or "appearance". I'm talking about physical quality...the nuanced physical differences.
Unfortunately, I really don't think this is a well-defined question, and if you take more time to study watches made by various manufacturers, I think this will gradually become clear to you.

For example, if one looks at PWs from 100+ years ago, there are high end American and Swiss watches, but they have very different styles. American PWs focused on highly decorated movements, while Swiss manufacturers demonstrated their dedication to quality in different ways, including careful finishing of every edge of every part, but often without elaborate decoration. Both approaches demonstrate attention to detail and high quality.

There are many ways to define "quality" and it's not as clear as you seem to think it is. Quality could mean attention to detail, i.e. fit and finish. It could mean effort applied to elaborate decoration or expensive manufacturing techniques (e.g. fancy dial textures). It could mean mechanical robustness. It could refer to complexity. All of these categories can be applied to various parts of the watch, including the movement, the case, and the dial.
 
Posts
1,922
Likes
1,177
Based on someone that owned close to 20 years of various watch magazines up until 2020.

Rolex models scored higher than majority of other brands. High 80’s to low 90’s. This was case, bracelet, movement finishing and running. Only other that I recall finishing in similar scores was Lange

Vintage. I’d say Omega Constellation were nice movements. Rolex were nice. Only owned a small number of regular models. IWC were also nicely finished. Only owned one VC. Nice. Many it seems to have left Longines off the lists and in my opinion. Longines were very nicely finished and you would be hard pressed to find any movement today finished as nice unless from one of the top five makers. Geneve stripes, perlage, beveled edges and gold jewelled settings.
 
Posts
11,227
Likes
19,668
My step dad was a watch/clock repairer & antique dealer for years while I was growing up and he always said Omega movements were superior to Rolex. It’s safe to assume he was talking up to probably the late 60’s mid 70’s.

As you’ve clarified you’re looking a vintage I’d still say in the 50’s/60’s mid range was made up of brands like;
Heuer
Rolex
Breitling

I’d put Omega and brands like Universal Geneve slightly higher, perhaps ‘upper mid range’.
Edited:
 
Posts
208
Likes
381
You judge quality of vintage watches based on how they survived for decades with less blemishes and defects or something else?
 
Posts
11,227
Likes
19,668
You judge quality of vintage watches based on how they survived for decades with less blemishes and defects or something else?
Who are you asking?
 
Posts
262
Likes
522
Unfortunately, I really don't think this is a well-defined question, and if you take more time to study watches made by various manufacturers, I think this will gradually become clear to you.

For example, if one looks at PWs from 100+ years ago, there are high end American and Swiss watches, but they have very different styles. American PWs focused on highly decorated movements, while Swiss manufacturers demonstrated their dedication to quality in different ways, including careful finishing of every edge of every part, but often without elaborate decoration. Both approaches demonstrate attention to detail and high quality.

There are many ways to define "quality" and it's not as clear as you seem to think it is. Quality could mean attention to detail, i.e. fit and finish. It could mean effort applied to elaborate decoration or expensive manufacturing techniques (e.g. fancy dial textures). It could mean mechanical robustness. It could refer to complexity. All of these categories can be applied to various parts of the watch, including the movement, the case, and the dial.
OK, I really appreciate this response...maybe self evident, but at least for me not...exacerbated by the fact that it's actually not easy to see a lot of vintage watches at once, including with back off - I've honestly only seen a handful in person.

I think the core of my particular question is related to mechanical quality and robustness. Perhaps a terrible analogy, but similar to cars of the same era. There were obvious mechanical quality differences related to tolerances, engineering, metallurgy, etc.. My dad's Mercedes W123 comes to mind.

Would love to hear additional thoughts and feedback on this.
 
Posts
213
Likes
939
.
I can only make a personal comment for Omega & Rolex vintage watches. Some years ago, my then little son dropped my 1970s Omega chrono from the 1st floor of our house, it landed on a hard marble floor. Beside a little crack in the crystal there was no issue at all with the watch. Some time later my Rolex 1016 also felt to the floor, at a height of less than one meter. The watch stopped working a needed a costly service to get it working again. My recently purchased neo vintage Rolex Explorer 2 shows some pitting on the inner case back , I’ve also never had those issues with my Omega watches.

Aesthetically I prefer vintage Rolex to be honest, but I think the huge price difference between both is not justified.

I am not a watchmaker nor a technical expert, but imho and from my observations so far the quality ( or at least their robustness) among Omega vintage watches is superior than those vintage Rolex watches.
Edited:
 
Posts
20,091
Likes
46,750
Many vintage watches either suffer or benefit from the price point and prestige of the modern brand, which in many cases has little connection to the previous company.

For example, looking at current offerings, one wouldn't necessarily appreciate the excellence of mid-20th century Longines, Eterna or even Certina. These companies have either essentially disappeared or been swallowed up and degraded by a conglomerate.

And on the flip side, it's humorous when someone finds a 1960s Ulysse Nardin and expects it to be something special, because they are familiar with the high price of the modern brand. This is somewhat the case for Girard Perregaux as well.

As for Rolex, I don't think anyone who is really knowledgable about watches would consider them to be high-end, either now or in the past. But they have a long history of making solid and robust movements and quality watches with appealing and conservative styling. I actually get a lot of pleasure from vintage Rolex. Of course, their marketing in recent decades has been second to none.
 
Posts
1,922
Likes
1,177
Many vintage watches either suffer or benefit from the price point and prestige of the modern brand, which in many cases has little connection to the previous company.

For example, looking at current offerings, one wouldn't necessarily appreciate the excellence of mid-20th century Longines, Eterna or even Certina. These companies have either essentially disappeared or been swallowed up and degraded by a conglomerate.

And on the flip side, it's humorous when someone finds a 1960s Ulysse Nardin and expects it to be something special, because they are familiar with the high price of the modern brand. This is somewhat the case for Girard Perregaux as well.

As for Rolex, I don't think anyone who is really knowledgable about watches would consider them to be high-end, either now or in the past. But they have a long history of making solid and robust movements and quality watches with appealing and conservative styling. I actually get a lot of pleasure from vintage Rolex. Of course, their marketing in recent decades has been second to none.
I have to disagree on Rolex. As I mentioned. Overall they #core better than many top 5 watch brands. Rolex gets a bad rap probably due to a lot of things, but the watches fit, finish and movements score high.

Check out some Watchtime reviews. Look at the movement finishing etc. and scores.

Check this review https://www.watchtime.com/reviews/batman-on-tour-testing-the-rolex-gmt-master-ii/

DON