Respectable Members In my personal opinion, in terms of looks the vintage Omega Seamaster 300m (from the 2913 to the 166.XXX) is better than the vintage Submariner. However, the Submariner can go deeper into the water. I do not think anyone who goes swimming in deep-water, will ever want his vintage diver watch to accompany him. The question is, how come the price of the vintage Submariner is far more expensive than that of the vintage 300m? Thank-you.
Also, it may be that the submariner had continued success and recognition since then and has become an iconic watch while the modern seamaster 300 doesn't have the same recognition
The Submariner is a very robust, solid, and water resistant watch. One of the key things to keep in mind here is that the SM300s with the Naiad crown were hopeless at keeping water out, which was one of the things that lead to the Submariner taking over as the UK MoD's watch of choice with the Milsub. The other thing is the Submariner and Blancpain Fifty Fathoms were the two original dive watches with rotating bezels released in 1954, and the sub is still produced to this day. In the watch world that sort of history and lineage is what earns a piece a special place in history.