are Omega's PO designers high?

[dinexus]

It wears very similar to the Pelagos, but the Pelagos is thinner.

I think the only real difference in size between the two is made up by the domed crystal (Pelly is flat). Are the cases themselves really that much different in actual thickness? I'm also very curious to see how this stacks against the 126600 in silhouette, because the 39.5mm is very close in dimension to the 40mm Sea Dweller, as illustrated by this shot that I shamelessly borrowed (sorry!) from WUS:

[Nellipj]

Here is your side by side of the 43.5 PO and the 43 Sea Dweller. Very similar size but the Rolex is thinner. 16.4 on the PO, 15.3 for the Rolex. Crystal is 31.5 for the PO and 31 for the Rolex. Bezel is 42 on the PO and 43 on the Rolex. Lug to lug is 49 for the PO and 50.4 for the Rolex.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chocodove]

Here is your side by side of the 43.5 PO and the 43 Sea Dweller. Very similar size but the Rolex is thinner. 16.4 on the PO, 15.3 for the Rolex. Crystal is 31.5 for the PO and 31 for the Rolex. Bezel is 42 on the PO and 43 on the Rolex. Lug to lug is 49 for the PO and 50.4 for the Rolex.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting, they are much closer than I thought. Thanks for taking the pic

[Panerai7]

Was looking at pictures of SM and found these

[JP Chestnut]

FFS. Some people. I hope the guy was blind.

[Nellipj]

Did he put it on himself with Elmers glue WTF.

[JP Chestnut]

Jizz.

[Panerai7]

Here is your side by side of the 43.5 PO and the 43 Sea Dweller. Very similar size but the Rolex is thinner. 16.4 on the PO, 15.3 for the Rolex. Crystal is 31.5 for the PO and 31 for the Rolex. Bezel is 42 on the PO and 43 on the Rolex. Lug to lug is 49 for the PO and 50.4 for the Rolex.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They both look great Pat.
Not surprised though they look similar in size being 43 and 43.5

[JP Chestnut]

Ignoring thickness, the PO has better proportions. That black date wheel though.

[Panerai7]

Am I going crazy? I'm starting to like this one a lot?

[JP Chestnut]

Pretty sure that orange is rubber. If so, I've already heard people complain about it failing - so yes, you're crazy.

[Panerai7]

Lol

[gwells]

You're crazy. For this, too.

[dinexus]

Pretty sure that orange is rubber. If so, I've already heard people complain about it failing - so yes, you're crazy.

lol x2


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dinexus]

FFS. Some people. I hope the guy was blind.

Some people just want to watch the world burn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JP Chestnut]

FFS. Some people. I hope the guy was blind.

Some people just want to watch the world burn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But apparently they require magnification to see it.

[Chocodove]

The point of a rubber bezel is lost on me. Never mind when it's part ceramic and part rubber.

[Nellipj]

Ignoring thickness, the PO has better proportions. That black date wheel though.

The date wheel is blue on the re-design.

[Nellipj]

Am I going crazy? I'm starting to like this one a lot?

You're not crazy. I like that one. The rubber part bezel scares me though.

[Joeprez]

It's a nice color scheme, but should have been a regular bezel insert.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JP Chestnut]

Ignoring thickness, the PO has better proportions. That black date wheel though.

The date wheel is blue on the re-design.

I'm glad they finally fixed that. It was the only bad thing about the Ti 8500 version.

[BBK357]

I've had some Omega....

To compare the modern-ish ones, I had a black ceramic smp and a blue Ti 8500... would much rather have the SMP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dinexus]

Ignoring thickness, the PO has better proportions. That black date wheel though.

The date wheel is blue on the re-design.

I'm glad they finally fixed that. It was the only bad thing about the Ti 8500 version.

Not only does the blue date wheel properly match, the black date wheel on the black dial option has silver numbers instead of white, which is an extremely cool detail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matt.wu]

Did we ever decide if the reason all the newest co-axial watches are so thick is because the movements are so thick?

Because all of Omegas newest watches are thick across the board, Speedy to Aqua Terra to SMP to PO. So either they are consciously making them all thick, or the movement dictates watch thickness.

[dnslater]

Did we ever decide if the reason all the newest co-axial watches are so thick is because the movements are so thick?

Because all of Omegas newest watches are thick across the board, Speedy to Aqua Terra to SMP to PO. So either they are consciously making them all thick, or the movement dictates watch thickness.

Omega Cal 8500/8501: 29mm diameter 5.5mm thickness (5.6mm for Cal 8501)
Omega Cal 1120: 25.6mm diameter 4mm thickness
Omega Cal 2500: 25.6 diameter 4.1mm thickness
Omega Cal 1164 (ETA 7750): 30mm diameter 7.9mm thickness
Rolex Cal 3135: 28mm diameter 6mm thickness
Rolex Cal 4130: 30.5mm diameter 6.5mm thickness

8500 movement is certainly thicker than the old 2500 and 1120, but thinner than what Rolex uses. 600m water resistance with a display case back is probably a bigger reason. I think the 8900 is thinner but cannot find specs.