This versus that... and reasons

Posts
5,636
Likes
5,811
I made a choice between two watches, and I know I'm not the only one, so I thought it might be instructive for others.

I could have bought this (not this exact one, ganked it from Chrono24):



Instead, I got this one:



I purposely chose two that looked very much alike. In the mid-50s when both of these were produced, the separation between Seamaster and Constellation were not all that great. Certainly, the Constellation line were predominately certified chronometers, whereas Seamasters were rarely so.

In general, I chose to not buy Constellations instead of Seamasters for the following:

* I already have a few modern chronometers.
* Restoring a Seamaster to original spec costs enough as is... and these specs are a lot looser in the 50s than COSC. Restoring a Connie? Forget it.
* Buying a Connie costs a lot more than buying a Seamaster of equivalent quality.
*Seamaster case parts seem to be more prevalent than Connie case parts.

Now, for me, Connies into the 60s and many Seamasters as well had pretty boring dials and hands and lugs. I like cases with character and not-stick hands and not-stick markers. It seems like a lot of you like the style of Seamaster or Connie that has stick hands, stick markers, and stick lugs. Not for me. 馃榾

So these were my choices. What choices did you make?
 
Posts
4,820
Likes
12,207
I spent a lot of time at my grandparents beach house as a kid. The neighbors had an old 50s wooden Chris Craft runabout, that they rarely brought out on the water. I loved that boat and everything about it, the look, the sound, the class. Somehow I associate the old Seamasters with that boat. There is one on the back of the 1948 reissue. For me, I really wanted it to say Seamaster. I don't think there is any real logic. Chris Craft yanked from the web:



Still waiting for the watch to come back from the watchmaker.

 
Posts
941
Likes
4,323
I made a choice between two watches, and I know I'm not the only one, so I thought it might be instructive for others.

I could have bought this (not this exact one, ganked it from Chrono24):



Instead, I got this one:



I purposely chose two that looked very much alike. In the mid-50s when both of these were produced, the separation between Seamaster and Constellation were not all that great. Certainly, the Constellation line were predominately certified chronometers, whereas Seamasters were rarely so.

In general, I chose to not buy Constellations instead of Seamasters for the following:

* I already have a few modern chronometers.
* Restoring a Seamaster to original spec costs enough as is... and these specs are a lot looser in the 50s than COSC. Restoring a Connie? Forget it.
* Buying a Connie costs a lot more than buying a Seamaster of equivalent quality.
*Seamaster case parts seem to be more prevalent than Connie case parts.

Now, for me, Connies into the 60s and many Seamasters as well had pretty boring dials and hands and lugs. I like cases with character and not-stick hands and not-stick markers. It seems like a lot of you like the style of Seamaster or Connie that has stick hands, stick markers, and stick lugs. Not for me. 馃榾

So these were my choices. What choices did you make?

I have been down that same path, so completely understand. I loved the Constellations I had, but wanted no more - too many of the standard ones bored me. So I turned to Seamasters of the same period and found that although many standard designs were of no particular interest, there were some I just loved. When this came up I jumped on it.

 
Posts
4,820
Likes
12,207
I should add that I had an option to buy a nice 14381 no-lume, cream dome-dialed Constellation in steel that was very similar, but opted for the above Seamster.
 
Posts
32
Likes
92
Connies into the 60s and many Seamasters as well had pretty boring dials and hands and lugs.

I do agree with you, and it's almost frustrating. It appears Omega had a real brain fart when it came to dial designs with so many models having stick indices in the 60s-70s.

Omega really peaked in the 50s with interesting cases and dial textures! Some of mine:

 
Posts
3,871
Likes
42,353
I still don't have any constellation :-( ... Working on it, but I must say that I'm in love with my KO 2627, there is something I can't explain. It regularly comes back on my wrist during the day, sometimes just for a few hours
 
Posts
3,407
Likes
13,204
If only they had a date quickset... 馃榿 I鈥檝e created the habit of having my phone remind me when the date that鈥檚 currently on the watch comes up, so I can wear it again for a day or two, only to wait another month till I put it back on.
 
Posts
32
Likes
92
If only they had a date quickset...

Cheers! It really is a pain to set the date
 
Posts
3,871
Likes
42,353
If only they had a date quickset... 馃榿 I鈥檝e created the habit of having my phone remind me when the date that鈥檚 currently on the watch comes up, so I can wear it again for a day or two, only to wait another month till I put it back on.
I hear you... Hence, I am more and more orienting my collection to non-calendar watches... My next Connie should ideally be so :-D
The more I think, the more I think I dont need date on my watches... I like a clean dial, no date no book writing!
 
Posts
6,693
Likes
52,654
SkunkPrince;

Your points are well taken. My problem is that I'm dually afflicted. I admire the '50s Omegas and their styling very much, but also appreciate the early 1960s Omegas for their comparative starkness. If I had to choose from the styles it'd have to be the '57 Constellation though.

Glad I'm not required to choose.