Speedmaster reduced or Seamaster Americas Cup

Posts
6
Likes
4
Hey Folks,

after an Omega Seamaster 2577 I like to buy a more modern Watch. I looked around and found two watches that appeals to me. The Speedmaster reduced from the nineties and a 2000 Seamaster Americas Cup. Both are same same nice but which will be a better choice regarding value increase? Both are offered for around 2.600€

Thank a lot in advance
 
Posts
81
Likes
90
For me it would be the Americas Cup - it’s got a kinda ‘recent retro’ styling, the sword hands (which I wish Omega would bring back), and the Sir Peter Blake connection which I think makes it more collectable in the long run. As it happens Fratello have an article up today extolling the virtues of the PB seamaster…
Edited:
 
Posts
9,955
Likes
15,634
Do you mean the 3 hand Seamaster AC? There was a chrono too I recall. The 3 hander It is nice but that isn't my favourite SMP, the one below is, ironically known as the Seamaster non-AC (yes really), model 2230.50. That said the AC is a nice watch too, particularly if you don't mind the branding which is a little in your face.

If you are for even a moment considering a Speedmaster Reduced I strongly recommend you take a chair, and devote an hour to reading up about them since they are not a straight forward purchase. They have their fans but those fans tend to sell up fast when any kind of intervention is needed so they need to be purchased with care (or deep pockets). The Seamaster is by far the better deal at that money IMO.

Unless you are on first name terms with Roger Smith (and I know a man who is), right now value increase is unlikely on any single watch you buy as we have seen the top of the market IMO so I would put that from your mind. Don't think of it as an investment, but something to be treasured and enjoyed.

 
Posts
2,437
Likes
6,873
Seamaster! No doubt, because; looks, water resistance, ease and cost of service and it got a helium release valve! 😉
 
Posts
2,538
Likes
3,398
Another vote for the Seamaster AC. It’s a better watch in every way, and is rarer than the Speedy Reduced.
 
Posts
627
Likes
2,011
+1 Seamaster.
As others have noted, I used to own a reduced. I’ve never had a less reliable watch. Owned it for about a year, over half of that it was in service (3 times!) and in the end it still wasn’t fixed. Glad I had warranty. Ended up trading in towards my speedy pro and have never looked back.
 
Posts
198
Likes
194
Speedy reduced. One of the most underrated watches in my opinion. Mine is from 1990 and runs super accurat. Great bracelets and unique little details on the dial that set it apart from the Speedy pro.
 
Posts
17,768
Likes
26,945
Speedy reduced. One of the most underrated watches in my opinion. Mine is from 1990 and runs super accurat. Great bracelets and unique little details on the dial that set it apart from the Speedy pro.
🍿
 
Posts
511
Likes
336
Speedmaster reduced.

Ultimately, are you a Seamaster person or a Speedmaster person?
 
Posts
2,446
Likes
4,203
mbp mbp
Speedmaster reduced.

Ultimately, are you a Seamaster person or a Speedmaster person?

nah I beg to differ…..I like them both, but I’m really a Flightmaster person ::stirthepot::😁
 
Posts
1
Likes
0
Do you mean the 3 hand Seamaster AC? There was a chrono too I recall. The 3 hander It is nice but that isn't my favourite SMP, the one below is, ironically known as the Seamaster non-AC (yes really), model 2230.50. That said the AC is a nice watch too, particularly if you don't mind the branding which is a little in your face.

If you are for even a moment considering a Speedmaster Reduced I strongly recommend you take a chair, and devote an hour to reading up about them since they are not a straight forward purchase. They have their fans but those fans tend to sell up fast when any kind of intervention is needed so they need to be purchased with care (or deep pockets). The Seamaster is by far the better deal at that money IMO.

Unless you are on first name terms with Roger Smith (and I know a man who is), right now value increase is unlikely on any single watch you buy as we have seen the top of the market IMO so I would put that from your mind. Don't think of it as an investment, but something to be treasured and enjoyed.

Very nice, I'm curious what year is the production of this?
 
Posts
1,105
Likes
13,232
The Speedy Reduced is way cooler than the AC Seamaster (the trophy on the dial looks like a Mrs. Butterworth bottle and the engraving on the side is pretty unattractive IMHO.) It isn't as cool as the "Non-AC" Seamaster.

 
Posts
9,955
Likes
15,634
Very nice, I'm curious what year is the production of this?
My own watch dates to 2002. In his article linked to above Ash suggests they were introduced in 2001 as a follow on to the AC which sounds right. I suspect they were only in production for a couple of years tops but even if longer production of all the 1120 powered sword hands models ended around 2007 so not a long window.

I just checked my Dec 2001 UK price list and the non AC is listed at £1,600 while the regular 2531.80 Bond is listed at £1,050 (same price as the 2254.50) so the non AC was considerably more. This may explain why you don’t see many non ACs about, they were 50% more expensive than the std Bond or Blake and even more expensive than the titanium models. Only the solid gold models cost more. It was a premium product but came with a premium price tag. In case anyone still cares, at this point the Speedy Reduced was £825, and the Pro 3570.50 cost £1,395.
Edited: