Omega Railsmaster vs Rolex Explorer

I know the topic of Omega vs Rolex has been rehashed so many times. My online research usually gave an edge to Rolex for having in house movements vs ETAs. Now that Omega has had their new Co-axial Metas certified calibers for a couple of years, I wonder if the Rolex still has any type of edge.

Here's some basic stats for the Railmaster and Explorer:

Case diameter: 40 | 39 mm
Antimagnetic: Yes | No
Water Resistant: 15 | 10 Bar
Anti-shock: Not mentioned | Yes
Caliber: 8806 | 3112
Caliber manufacturer: Both in house
COSC: Yes for both.

I've always been completely against Rolex, not so much for their quality but because of the brand itself. For some reason, it just feels that the brand rubs off in the wrong way to certain people who wear it. Don't want to start a flame war, but rather understand the why behind "Rolex is a Rolex". For the first time ever, I am considering getting one and hence wanted to get your perspectives related to these two watches.

I chose the above two models since they seem to be very similar in size, style, and technical qualities.

Here's some comments I've seen around the inter-webs(not paraphrased) in favor of Rolex:

- Rolex uses traditional materials on a proven caliber for this watch.
- Rolex manufacturing and quality control are second to none.
- Rolex watches tend to increase in value over time. Or least not decrease.
- Rolex doesn't experiment as much with their movements and hence very dependable and easily serviced.
- Omega experiments a bit more with the calibers and had initial quality problems with their Co-axial models when they first came out(not the related to the Metas ones).
- Rolex used a special type of steel that makes it last longer and more resistant to the elements.

I've had a Speedmaster and Aquaterra for almost a year and both have been doing great. Not sure what else Rolex could offer.

Only thing about the Explorer si like is the dial. Much cleaner and simpler.

Source: Pictures and stats taken from the Omega and Rolex websites.

 

On paper, the Omega wins but for me, Rolex is the clear winner. The build quality/tolerances of a modern Rolex bracelet, the click of the bezel on the ball-bearing setup, the thinness of everything combined with that level of rigidity, the level of accuracy/regulation of their movements..... you'd have to hold a Rolex in one hand and an Omega in another to understand what I'm on about. It's inexplicable.

For vintage Rolex (5-digit and older), I feel that Omega made better comparable watches.

 

That’s not exactly the watch I’d put up against the explorer. The rail master is a bit cheaper of a finishing level. Maybe air king vs the rail master.


Want some fights

PO vs Sea Dweller take price out of the equation. Then put it in

PO vs sub

SMP vs sub

Globemaster vs DJ or Oyster Perpetual.

 

My wife has an Oyster Perpetual and you are right on the Braclet front when compared to my Aquaterra. On the precision side, both are pretty similar. Haven't noticed much difference on that front. Though I prefer the quickset time on mine.

 

Oh goodie! I get to post this again:

http://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=3072156&rid=0

 

Hell Aqua Terra versus DJ.

 

I've never really held a Rolex for more than a couple of minutes so haven't had extended hands on time, but from the ones I've seen either in shop windows or on people's wrists something about them looks higher quality than any Omega I've seen. It might be the satin finish or the way they are polished and "sparkle" but they look more expensive generally I think.

I bought a Speedmaster brand new in 2016 and it gains 17 seconds a day. The hour marker on the sub dial was misaligned right out of the box. I bought an older bracelet for it from the mid 90's and the end links aren't marked, had notches cut in the steel where it's so roughly made (1499/842) and both bracelets aren't even marked Swiss Made. The fact they still even sell the 1171/633 to people as well for nearly £400 is shocking - it's a worse quality bracelet than the one on my £25 stainless steel Casio watch.

I sent a Bond Seamaster automatic to Omega a few years ago for service and it was returned to me making a terrible grinding noise and had to be returned twice and serviced again because it was gaining so much time.

I love Omega's designs and love that the brand has no negativity or stigma behind it like Rolex (other than they release too many "limited" editions) and appreciate all Omega was in the 50's/60's and how they push boundaries now with things like co-axial... But from what I've seen personally I really don't think the quality matches the price and they have a strong "parts bin" attitude to things where parts of the watch are slightly wrong for the model sometimes or leftover from previous versions.

My current reference Speedmaster has an entirely different caseback, bracelet engraving, and end links to one made even 6 months afterwards in the same reference and there's loads of weird old transitional models from the past because they just don't have strong quality control.

You'd be happy with the Railmaster if you like the design and that's the reason you're buying it and in theory it -should- be more accurate but I doubt it's as well finished overall.

 

I only have four nice watches. Two Omega and two Rolex. My daily go-to is the Explorer II, as I work in a rough environment and that one is truly a work watch. It initially took me several months before I was comfortable wearing it in public because I was all too aware of some of the perceptions of the brand. Yes; I know that I was letting too many years of marketing and social stigma swim in my head. I never had that problem with Omega.

Today’s choice is my Speedy Pro. I usually choose this on my non-work days. Both the Rolex I have are very accurate when worn daily. Within a second or so per day. My Speedy gains about two seconds per day and my Seamaster gains about five.

What was the question again? I do give the slight edge to Rolex for build quality. But I do feel the brand is very polarizing to the greater populous than Omega will ever be.

 

I currently don't own any Rolex watches but do have 2 Omega watches. To me, I always thought that Rolex made nicer watches in terms of finishing, looks, and feel on the wrist while Omega had better tool watches. Rolex watches just look nicer and better for the most part with their superior finishing.

I just refuse to buy one because I don't like the way Rolex treats customers.

 

Here’s another take on the Explorer-Railmaster thing:-


https://omegaforums.net/threads/railmaster-vs-explorer.60924/page-4#post-799413

I’ve no idea what the Explorer’s accuracy is like but my RM is just under +1 second per day after a little under 12 months normal wear (& tear).


Result after 7 days without intervention, daytime on the wrist, night time on the bedside table crown down (no manual winding).

Which one’s the best? The other one.

 

I don't care much about the Omega vs Rolex battles, but this new (regular) Railmaster is a killer watch.

 

Tough choices , still give a slight edge to Rolex , I own both

 

Is anyone here, besides professional watchmakers, qualified to do a comparison other than on looks?

That's a rhetorical question. Reading the posts in this thread prove the answer is a resounding NO.

 

Actually, there is. You buy both watches, then go to a bar, and find the girl with the biggest fake boobs, and ask her which watch should be worn to be assured of getting laid. If she says the Omeega, then not only do you get some action, but she could be datable after the interlude.

 

After having read your linked Op Ed earlier, I feel more qualified. Those judgement qualifiers have made me both more secure in my enjoyment of Panerai (and I'm subsequently wearing them more frequently in public settings) as well as order a Ploprof as my next acquisition! I really think the Luminor and Ploprof crown guards surpass anything else on the market for damage potential chucking at heads.

 

Such barbarians! You have clearly overlooked the more subtle aspects of weaponry.

An OmegaForums gentlemen will always choose the fine slashing razor edges of his Omega over the mere blunt trauma tools from Rolex and Panerai.

Now if you don’t mind I should very much like to return to my aeronautical systems research...I need to choice the right aircraft for my next trip overseas.

 

Well I have never seen a Rolex vs Omega discussion before on the OF...so I am thrilled to be posting on this topic for the first time

Replying to the OP @watchos: if you own the AT I would go with the new Railmaster as it is a more casual watch. The Explorer is a lovely watch and I adore mine, but it certainly has a more polished finished and will attract more attention. If you wear the AT on a bracelet I would think it would be pretty redundant vs the Explorer and I do think the AT has a better finished dial.

My general take as an owner of both brands (6 Omegas, 3 Rollies)

Dials: Omega
Bracelets: Rolex
Leather/Nato: Omega
Case: Draw, depends on the watch.
Accuracy: Draw
Reliability: Rolex
Resale: Rolex
Omega vs Rolex Boutique Service (pre and post sales): Omega
Pre-owned purchase/bang for buck: Omega

Some photos below from my humble collection. The JLC Reverso Duo and Tresor have the best finishing.



Tim from WatchBox put in quite an entertaining video yesterday with some fun comments on the Omega vs Rolex discussion...starts at 22m:15s

Cheers,

RP

 

If I recall correctly you came here 3 years ago with just the Breitling. I just wanted to compliment you on the nice and diverse collection you have build up in that (short) period of time. Congrats and well done.

 

Thanks!

I started the collection with the Breitling SOH purchase May 2013....first Omega was the bumblebee AT 15000 gauss Oct 2013...then I fell down the rabbit hole