I’m new to watches and I wanted my first to be an Omega. I like them because of immature reasons like the moon thing and the James Bond thing, but after looking into them for a couple of days I see that they have low reserves compared to other brands. Rolex Submariner has 70 hours, and even the much lower-priced Tudor Black Bay has 70 hours, while Speedmaster and Seamaster come in at 50-55 hours. It seems like that’s an indication of worse design and engineering. Or, if not, what am I missing?
I think this is the one aspect where omegas are kind of behind. They are leading on magnetic and water resistance and accuracy.
I believe they were the first to introduce the METAS certification. Also the only brand that officially means their water resistance (officially stating 30m water resistance means you can swim and dive with it).
I was wondering what their strengths are, thank you.
You’ll get over it. I also was overly concerned with Power Reserve, but then I realise that I either wear it daily so it doesnt matter as long as it still runs when I woke up in the morning (no need to adjust and wind at all) or I wear it in a weekly/monthly rotation, so as long as it run when on my wrist, it’s good enough (I will adjust and wind a different watch every day anyway).
That’s a good point!
Dude. Wait till you find out about Oris and Panarai with their 5-day power reserve.
My advice is never to buy watches based on specs. Controversially for this forum: not even accuracy specs.
55hr vs 72hr reserves. 100m vs. 200m water resistance. 21,600 vph vs 28,800 vph. +2s vs. +20s per day accuracy.
None of them mean anything in isolation. Don’t get me wrong… know these specifications, but they’re all just one factor among many, and mostly determined by marketing needs.
Buy watches because you like them as a whole, not because of a particular spec.
My advice is never to buy watches based on specs. Controversially for this forum: not even accuracy specs.
55hr vs 72hr reserves. 100m vs. 200m water resistance. 21,600 vph vs 28,800 vph. +2s vs. +20s per day accuracy.
None of them mean anything in isolation. Don’t get me wrong… know these specifications, but they’re all just one factor among many, and mostly determined by marketing needs.
You’ll see people literally posting stuff like, “I wont consider that watch because it’s only water rated to 100m” when in reality the watch will never even get near a swimming pool.
Buy watches because you like them as a whole, not because of a particular spec.
You are missing co-axial caliber quality.
The Omega movements were developed before longer power reserves became super popular.
Omega movements are just as good as Tudor movements. Rolex movements are nicer, but only in ways that matter to watchmakers, the end user won’t notice it at all.
why is power reserve the characteristic you consider the most important?
Omega has a co-axial movement complication that is unique and a METAs certification that is equivalent to Rolex superlative chronometer and better than Tudor cosc.
Omega has the movement completely antimagnetic up to 15000 gauss, something Rolex does not have, and when you buy it you can see the testing done at such high magnetic field.
Omega water resistance is defined by more stringent parameters then the standard testing.
Power reserve is nice to have, but it is also easy achievable by just reducing the frequency rate at which the movement works, so to me is really the last thing I would look for in a movement.
Power reserve is nice to have, but it is also easy achievable by just reducing the frequency rate at which the movement works, so to me is really the last thing I would look for in a movement.
Omega’s beat rate is lower than Rolex or Tudor movements
This is helpful, thank you.
Quartz watches can have a 1-5 yr power reserve but doesn’t make them better. Wrong metric to look at here