Dismiss Notice

STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Vintage Omega Seamaster 300 vs Rolex Submariner

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by nurktwin, Aug 31, 2010.

  1. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    5
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    Ok, the Rolex Submariner is a classic -- perhaps the most legendary sports watch of all time. But the Sub is also an ad nauseam cliche due to it's ubiquity. Everyone has one -- even the posers. What are folks thoughts on a vintage late 1960s Omega Seamaster 300 as an alternative? In house movement and unique styling. A stunning matte dial and no bull sh*t tool watch design which eschews the modern day gloss dials and blingy feminine white gold hour indices which soil modern day dive watches. [​IMG]
     


  2. Xiaogou

    Xiaogou Senior member

    Messages:
    3,794
    Likes Received:
    47
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    I am a huge Omega fan but the Sub is awesome too. Can't go wrong with either one.
     


  3. 0b5cur1ty

    0b5cur1ty Senior member

    Messages:
    2,004
    Likes Received:
    46
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Comparing vintage to vintage, I'd take the Seamaster 300 in a heartbeat.
     


  4. Master Squirrel

    Master Squirrel Senior member

    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Omega is a very nice watch.
     


  5. jacnyr

    jacnyr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    While the Seamaster is not a perfect watch, the vintage 300 is quite a looker. One would have no problems selling as they are very desirable.
     


  6. Singular

    Singular Senior member

    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    22
    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    I have a 70s 5513 - and have many times thought about getting a Seamaster 300. The thing is...I know, that every time I would pick a nice vintage mil-diver for casual days, a nice suit contrast or a night out...the Submariner would win. Every single time. The watches are more or less interchangeable (mil history, same size, same aesthetics, same "feeling" on the wrist), but for me the worn, patinated 5513 would be my pick every day.

    Worth considering is that there is a quite hefty price difference - you pay approx half for the Omega, and it is available as a NOS from WatchCo (a quite cool thing - a brand new "vintage" watch).

    [​IMG]

    /M
     


  7. taxgenius

    taxgenius Senior member

    Messages:
    4,884
    Likes Received:
    305
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    You would probably be able to resell the rolex a lot quicker, but that alone doesn't justify the higher price.
     


  8. robinsongreen68

    robinsongreen68 Senior member

    Messages:
    2,126
    Likes Received:
    2,149
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    it seems the OP was comparing the sm300 to a modern sub -14060 or whatever the newest iteration is. in which case i would certainly take the omega, the ubiquity of submariners is a turn-off for me too.

    if you're talking about a vintage 5513 or 5512, though, it's a different matter. the vintage subs have so much more character than the modern versions.
     


  9. Singular

    Singular Senior member

    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    22
    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Well - in that case it's pretty easy; if for sports, diving, sailing, rough living take the modern Sub. If you are up to hanging around the office, bars and cafÃ[​IMG]s take the SM300.

    /M
     


  10. entrero

    entrero Senior member

    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Ok, the Rolex Submariner is a classic -- perhaps the most legendary sports watch of all time. But the Sub is also an ad nauseam cliche due to it's ubiquity. Everyone has one -- even the posers. What are folks thoughts on a vintage late 1960s Omega Seamaster 300 as an alternative? In house movement and unique styling. A stunning matte dial and no bull sh*t tool watch design which eschews the modern day gloss dials and blingy feminine white gold hour indices which soil modern day dive watches.
    Sorry to burst your bubble but everyone except watch enthusiasts will say "oh is that a Rolex?" or thieves may take a closer look
     


  11. Ianiceman

    Ianiceman Senior member

    Messages:
    2,651
    Likes Received:
    485
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Location:
    Keyboard War Room
    I like the general line of thinking:

    Subs are common as fleas on a dog's arse
    Vintage watches can add a nice dimension
    Wearing an Omega is no disgrace

    However that omega pictured just has too many hash marks between the dial and the bezel ot just looks too busy to me.

    Right line of thinking, wrong watch!
     


  12. dv_indian

    dv_indian Senior member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Location:
    Northern California
    I like the Yacht-Master. It is sporty, distinctive and not ubiquitous like the sub.
     


  13. LanceW

    LanceW Senior member

    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    I don't know anything about Omega vintage repair but can vouch that the Rolex Service Centers have stopped repairing their older offerings.
     


  14. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    5
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    I have a 70s 5513 - and have many times thought about getting a Seamaster 300. The thing is...I know, that every time I would pick a nice vintage mil-diver for casual days, a nice suit contrast or a night out...the Submariner would win. Every single time. The watches are more or less interchangeable (mil history, same size, same aesthetics, same "feeling" on the wrist), but for me the worn, patinated 5513 would be my pick every day.

    Worth considering is that there is a quite hefty price difference - you pay approx half for the Omega, and it is available as a NOS from WatchCo (a quite cool thing - a brand new "vintage" watch).

    [​IMG]

    /M


    That's a beautiful 5513. I think the 5513 looks better than the 5512 as the 5513 doesn't have the chronometer certification verbiage which busies the 5512 dial.
     


  15. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    5
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    it seems the OP was comparing the sm300 to a modern sub -14060 or whatever the newest iteration is. in which case i would certainly take the omega, the ubiquity of submariners is a turn-off for me too. if you're talking about a vintage 5513 or 5512, though, it's a different matter. the vintage subs have so much more character than the modern versions.
    I like the vintage subs -- the 5512 and 5513 no dates are cool. So is the 1680 date version. The character of the modern day subs was diminished when Rolex added the sapphire crystal and white gold hour markers -- giving the Sub a "colder" more blingy feminine appearance which is not in keeping with the tool watch origins of the timepiece. Of course modern day Omega dive watches are just as blingy as they added gold hour markers too (except for the fantastic, but discontinued 2254.50 which had a stunning matte dial).
     


Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by