Does anyone else think the modern Omega's have become too thick? I've been thinking about flipping my Blancpain Trilogy GMT when it gets back from service, so I've been looking at options for another GMT. When I was looking at the Planet Ocean GMT 600m I saw it's 17.25mm thick! Not finding a GMT in the Omega line up that worked for me, I went back and looked at the DSOM but at 44.25mm x 16.5mm it's big too. Heck, my old Rolex 16600 Sea Dweller was only 14.8mm thick and even it had trouble sliding under the shirt sleeve occasionally.

I noticed that with the change from the 2500 to 8500 caliber movements, the cases became significantly thicker. I don't mind larger diameter watches as long as they sit well on the wrist (heck, I have a 48mm Breitling, but it's only 12.5mm thick).

Anyone else notice this and any thoughts on if Omega might find a way to make the new movements thinner?

 

it's been noted on the webiverse that companies are "slowly" drifting back to more moderate sizes. I'm dubious however simply because watches are "conspicuous consumption" items. They need to be obvious to meet that requirement.

if the largest market is still Asia then I don't think they'll be moving back to 40mm/13mm any time soon.

 

I'm with you on this one. I looked at the new sm300, and it felt too thick, especially when you are as clumsy as I am at times

 

An ultra-thin collector can only dream......

 

Yes, there will be thinner watches from Omega in the coming years.

 

So, the 8500 is 1.4mm thicker than the 2500, which doesn't account for the much thicker cases they've been using since the change in movements. That's frustrating because it means TO ME that the extra thickness may be for aesthetics more than anything else.

 

I don't think the thickness has anything to do with the movements or the cases but is due to the sapphire crystal backings on all of these watches.

Especially once you look at the PO series. I'd be interested to know how thick the crystal has to be to withstand 600m of pressure.

 

I think the PO 2500 series is very well-balanced between presenting a robust, strong, professional-grade dive watch case, while yet being thin enough that wearable and well-proportioned. The PO 8500 - and that includes the new SM 300 - are just absurdly thick, to the point of being ridiculous.

I would like to see Omega go back to a PO2500 thickness case/caseback. I would also like to see the return of a solid caseback option, featuring that gorgeous, high-relief seamonster that the PO2500 offered. A transparent caseback as an option would be fine - as it is for a Speedmaster sapphire sandwich - but the PO2500 casebacks are classics in their own right. And a "CERTIFIED HIGH PRESSURE WATERPROOF" caseback on the SM 300 would have been magnificent, and completed vintage tribute on the watch perfectly.

 

The worst thickness is 9300. Too bad.

 

I know. I was so pumped when I heard about the '57 coming in at 42mm, but then I remembered the case would still be shaped like a can of soup.

 

The new Seamaster 300 Master Co-Axial & PO 2500 42mm have the same thick

 

I stopped by Hyde Park Jewelers in Cherry Creek today to check out the GMT Master IIc and BLNR, but they didn't have either in stock. They also own the Omega Boutique next door and just 3 weeks ago opened a Breitling Boutique two doors down.



I tried on the steel and Ti PO GMT watches but didn't care for either. They are 42mm I believe but seemed small and way too thick.



Then I tried on the DSOM and liked it except the silver Chrono hands on the subdials are hard to see and it seems thick too at 16.1mm.



The contrast on the subdials will be better on the Grey Side of the Moon coming out in early 2015 since it will have black hands on a grey dial. MSRP is supposed to be the same as the DSOM.



The Grey Side of the Moon will also come on a gator strap and I imagine that the lighter color case will show less finger prints.

All of these (Moon and POs) have sapphire casebacks which while nice add too much to the thickness.