1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Vintage Omega Seamaster 300 vs Rolex Submariner

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

  1. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    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:
    3,793
    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
    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:
    1,278
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Omega is a very nice watch.
     
  5. jacnyr

    jacnyr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    83
    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
    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:
    4,747
    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:
    2,030
    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
    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
    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
    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
    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
    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
    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
    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).
     
  16. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    I don't know anything about Omega vintage repair but can vouch that the Rolex Service Centers have stopped repairing their older offerings.

    Yikes!
     
  17. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    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!


    Here's the modern day Omega 2254.50 which was recently discontinued:

    [​IMG]
     
  18. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    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
    I don't think many people drop $7k on a new Submariner to play sports, dive or sail with it. Better to use a disposable Casio G Shock. The modern day Sub sapphire crystal will crack/explode if it falls 4 feet to a hard surface -- more scratchproof but not as robust as the vintage acrylic crystals. I would imagine most who buy a modern Sub view it as a fashion accessory and wear it to the office, bars and cafes.
     
  19. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    I like the Yacht-Master. It is sporty, distinctive and not ubiquitous like the sub.

    This one?

    [​IMG]
     
    1 person likes this.
  20. nurktwin

    nurktwin Senior member

    Messages:
    288
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    Sorry to burst your bubble but everyone except watch enthusiasts will say "oh is that a Rolex?" or thieves may take a closer look

    I think they look for the cyclops more than anything else. Omega doesn't have a "bubble."
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by