Too redundant?

Posts
1,179
Likes
15,775
Ok, so here’s my dilemma: my collection is diver heavy. I have a vintage (but fully restored) Seamaster that was passed down from my Dad, and I will never sell. It’s pressure tested and frankly does everything I need the Sub for. I find myself wearing the Seamaster the most. On the flip side, there’s nothing quite like a 5 digit Sub…it’s a classic. But, is it redundant to have two similar watches in the collection? Selling the Sub would free up funds for another purchase (thinking hard about a white dial Speedy)
 
Posts
1,773
Likes
4,241
Accept that you are a diver man, otherwise you would not have all them. Do you really want a chrono?
Also, you only have one no date!
 
Posts
23,113
Likes
51,604
How dare you call two divers redundant. Personally, I think it's ok to have at least eight Subs plus seven 62mas's plus nine challenge divers ... plus dozens of other divers. 🙄
 
Posts
662
Likes
3,420
Tough decision, but I would rather slowly save for the white dial Speedy. I think in the long run you would regret selling your Rolex even though it's redundant dive watch.
 
Posts
1,781
Likes
2,606
You’re asking people on the Omega Forums about a matter of excess when it comes to watch collecting?
 
Posts
1,179
Likes
15,775
You’re asking people on the Omega Forums about a matter of excess when it comes to watch collecting?
Ha! So true. Should have remembered my audience 😀
 
Posts
3,310
Likes
8,715
Please adjust the bezel on that Seamaster! 😀 I think you have two great divers there and wouldn't part with the Sub.
 
Posts
330
Likes
266
Like a lot of the members here, I’m the wrong guy to ask. I’m mostly a chronograph guy, but I have multiple divers and don’t necessarily see them as redundant. If I were you, I’d keep the no-date Sub … it’s a classic.
 
Posts
1,781
Likes
2,606
Everyone else in the world: “it looks like you have two of the same watch.”

People here: “have you thought about adding a Fifty Fathoms?”

Do not seek the counsel of restraint here. It has forsaken these lands.
 
Posts
176
Likes
307
It's only redundant if you think it is.
If you don't think it is, then it isn't.
 
Posts
7,516
Likes
13,890
Keep the Sub, it's the definitive watch in the diver genre. No duplication that I can see, they both stand on their own.
 
Posts
12,867
Likes
22,208
I thought I was going to scroll down and see 25 dive watches. Two isn’t redundancy, it’s far too few!
 
Posts
1,179
Likes
15,775
I thought I was going to scroll down and see 25 dive watches. Two isn’t redundancy, it’s far too few!
Here are the others! (With the exception of that HODINKEE special on the end 😀)
 
Posts
2,160
Likes
8,292
Please, for the love of all things holy, keep both of those and add the white Speedy when you are ready (and I’m wearing a white Speedy now).
 
Posts
2,644
Likes
4,501
I'd be too embarrassed to wear the Rolex too.......after all people might think that your a typical Rolex wanker! ::stirthepot::😁
 
Posts
1,691
Likes
5,392
Great thread title, BTW. "Too redundant" is itself redundant, brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department. Similar to "very unique".

(Sorry, but I'm a teacher, which means I can be a pedantic jerk. But I repeat myself.)

Oh, and I agree that you need way more divers.
 
Posts
3,310
Likes
8,715
"Too redundant" is itself redundant

You said out loud what many of us were thinking. 👍