You got all this wrong! If as you say ceramic fades, so omega should be more than concerned! They make ceramic cases... The whole case. Not just the bezel. So the whole case fades? As you said, omega, and Rolex know what they're doing. That's why they turned ceramic in the first place, so that they won't fade.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Chemical treatments can fade. Natural ceramic colors (i.e. white, black, grey) don't. I don't know the process for the Rolex ceramic so I can't be certain (do they disclose any of this info, ever?) but Omega uses natural ceramics, barring the blues, reds, and greens they use on bezels.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RubberB is great, and honestly should be offered as OEM, not the crap that Rolex put on the everose Yachtmaster. Then again, I think Rolex needs a Ti Sub as well as a Sub chrono with waterproof pushers (as in the PO chrono, not the Daytona), but they'll never do it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's not Rolex's style to go wacko. Dive watches have their unidirectional bezel to be used as Chrono for a reason. Luxury can't be a 2 in 1 thing. If you want that, buy a Casio.
Diver watches, GMT, chronographs, all should have one purpose. This is luxury territory. It's like a Ferrari or a Rolls Royce; both are top end cars with one purpose each.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
More like Audi.... Rolex and Omega are only luxury in price. They are at the top of mid level watch. With excellence in design and performance, but Jordan luxury. Yes they have their precious metals and bling lines but they're not luxury. Rolex tried with Cellini, but didn't quite make it to the level of Patek, Vacheron, etc etc
Good to see that this thread has not devolved into a nasty O vs R discussion. 😀
I would agree with you except for the fact that Rolex has patented almost everything in the luxury watch industry. Heck they invented the very meaning of mechanical watches. They invented the date window, the waterproof, gmt... And the list goes on and on. You can't say that Rolex is what Rolex is today because of some naming like Audi. Audi is just another iteration of VW. They're just better built. Can we say that Omega is a Swatch but better built? Of course not. They are top notch engineering watches. Rolex is an A+ category watch. Not because they're cheaper than Pateck Philippe that it means they're worse. But they have a different aspect and view of luxury watches. Maybe you can compare Audi with Longines for instance. But to my view, even Omega is higher than Audi. You know, I compared Rolex and Omega to Ferrari and RR before. You do know that there are better than those like Pagani and Koenigsegg... But thing is, Ferrari is for cars what Rolex is for watches: they make very performant pieces in house. I'm still fan for both Rolex and omega and will never buy other brands for the only reason that they do what they do in a conventional way, their way, Rolex more. Other brands try to differentiate themselves from the classic but I don't like it. So you see? We're all friends here, I like Omega and Rolex. I got 2 Omegas that I ❤️: the limited edition 007 (2008) and the Moonwatch (2011)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's not about liking. Rolex is by far the brand most present in my collection, and I love it. Personally I like it over Omega pound for pound, at least at the moment I acknowledge the edge omega brings technologically but to me, to almost quote you, it does seem sometimes a little too Swatch. But they do have the GM, the RM and the AT and of course the reliable work horse: the speedy. They do have some incredible vintage pieces and a solid history.
Rolex just resonates more with me at the moment. It didn't use to, but it does now. But being the first at something doesn't make it a luxury item or Ford would be above any other car brand in the planet in luxury and Tesla about last.
Anyway the brand you want to align with it in cars is irrelevant, as is whatever I like; point is what Rolex is excellent at is mid-level tool watches. Watches that are reliable , well engineered, well designed and at their core simple and almost utilitarian in their beauty and purity. With exceptions of course.
Outside of the preconceptions of many I don't see how rolex is more bling than what omega and others bring to the table. A sub, an explorer, a simple datejust or OP or DD are as simple as it gets and are less present than a Planet Ocean or a Brietling.
But Rolex made its name as a watch to wear at work....when work tales place in environments that are a little tougher than most. Hence the need for water proofing, shock absorption, anti magnetic qualities etc etc. These are workmen watches...affluent workmen. How the market has placed Rolex in perception and price is more a reflection of excellence and marketing than luxury.
At least I think so, and certainly the broader horological world sees it that way too.
1971 5512
1969 1675
Explorer 1
OP grape
16710
14060m
White Daytona
Blue OP explorer dial
And sold my E2
Omega I sold everything except my AT Blue. I had a PO LMLE, 8500 PO, 2500 PO XL speedy pro, smp 300 and AT. I may get the sedna FOIS, a GM and/ or a RM but not in a rush.
Too late for what, exactly?
Still surprised you sold the PO LMLE- the way you photographed and seemed to cherish it. Hope it's that you just "got over it" and not that you had to "Sophie's choice" it.
Once my uncle dropped his gold datejust and all the helium came out.
Once my uncle dropped his gold datejust and all the helium came out.
