Have you guys seen the new Aqua Terra in person? After seeing the AT on the website, I decided to stop by my local boutique to check them out. From the website and pictures, the watch looks great and at a great price. However, when seeing the watch in person, I was underwhelmed. The watch felt cheap. The bottom edges of watch was sharp. The color of the watch was off from the websites pictures. Usually the watch looks better in person but here was not the case.

 

I don't really like the new blue dial one to begin with, but it would be disappointing if the white dial version didn't wow me in person. I think it's a really great design and choice of colors.

 

The one that's missing from your message, and the one I really want to see in person, is the 38mm dark blue model, the successor to the "Skyfall" (below). My first reaction was that the horizontal stripes were a step back from the previous model design-wise, but it needs to be seen in person to be truly evaluated.

 

I am not a big fan of the dial. It screams TAG Heuer Aquaracer to me minus the bezel.

 

Agreed, unfortunately I feel that the Aqua Terra line, aside from the 15000 Gauss technology, is going in the wrong direction... I find myself still infatuated with the Caliber 8500 Skyfall Aqua Terra

 

Due respect to others' opinions, but I disagree strongly with the above. My take is that the 8900 AT is a vast improvement on the MasterCoaxial from an aesthetics perspective, and the tech gap versus the 8500 Skyfall is too large to ignore. I've had the blue Master Chronometer for ~4 weeks now (silver second hand) ; it's just a fantastic daily wearer, it looks so good, very comfortable, and I really enjoy putting it on every morning.

 

The grey dial seems pretty awesome.

 

Points taken, I do agree that the technology has improved significantly. However, I think this has resulted in a bulkier case, which to me takes away from some of the sleekness. Regardless, still a great piece, and perhaps I would feel differently if I owned one

Cheers,

G

 

Agree with several of the sentiments in this thread. The horizontal teak on the new dial is a step back. Some day I'd like to add a blue AT to my stable and I would much prefer the date at 3 and the vertical teak.

 

I just can't get past the new orientation of the lines on the dial. Omega go on about the idea that the teak concept "recalls the wooden decks of luxury sailboats". Well, I've been on dozens of yachts and I'm yet to see one where the deck timbers go port - starboard. They always go bow - stern.

 

I know my yacht has vertical teak planks

 

Maybe the crown is the new bow?

 

Yeah, perhaps. I’ve heard that the latest yacht designs have rotated the keel 90 degrees and they will now sail sideways...

 

Agree.....

 

Now that you mention it. Yes it does. Now I cannot unsee it.

 

Having owned the Tag, it doesn't. Not by a long way. IMHO, the new AT is a seriously brilliant watch.

 

Although the AT is clearly a better looking watch, I do agree that the horizontal lines are unfortunately similar to a TAG...

 

The only thing I like about the new AT is the new integrated rubber strap option.

As soon as Omega put the date at 6 I think they then felt the horizontal teak planking would be required..which is what I really don't like in the new design...as any fashion guru will tell you horizontal lines make you look fat

Between the new AT and the Globemaster blue dial on a a steel bracelet, the Globemaster wins by a mile IMO.

 

Globemaster is super on leather. Prefer the AT on steel IMO.

Having had both ATs, I am a bit surprised at HOW MUCH I like the AT master chrono. I hadn't expected to feel such a big preference. But it really works - in the office and outdoors at the weekend. The AT is the way, honestly. And the comparison with the Tag -on any level- is just LMAO.

 

I sort of see the similarity, but overall, not really.