Thinking about next purchase.
Thinking about next purchase.
As I hope for my PP fiasco to end soon, I'm seeing up for my next purchase. I've always liked the look of the Daytona with it's bezel but never quite loved the actual watch enough to bite at it.
The Omega Speedy 57 I saw first in one of Pat's WRUW posts and immediately knew I had to see this in person at some point. It strikes me just right with the dual register layout, vintage lume, sweet bracelet and great movement.
Also, I've been eyeing Mike's Black Bay Chrono and that also has been moved onto my list now. Again the dual register etc really clicks for me.
Frankly I can't go wrong with either but now it's just to see both in person, try them on etc.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
The Omega Speedy 57 I saw first in one of Pat's WRUW posts and immediately knew I had to see this in person at some point. It strikes me just right with the dual register layout, vintage lume, sweet bracelet and great movement.
Also, I've been eyeing Mike's Black Bay Chrono and that also has been moved onto my list now. Again the dual register etc really clicks for me.
Frankly I can't go wrong with either but now it's just to see both in person, try them on etc.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Last edited by ericf4 on Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
- jswing
- Founder, TDWC MM300 Fan Club
- Posts: 8355
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 8:54 am
- Name: Jeff
- Location: NJ
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
I'm a fan of dual register chronos, and love both the Tudor and Omega. I'd probably choose the Tudor since to me it represents better value. If they ever put that in the 39mm case like the 58 I'll be very tempted.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
The Omega would be my choice.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
both nice, but I stopped liking useless tachy bezels
‘I don’t worry about a thing, 'cause I know nothing’s gonna be alright’ Mose Allison
- Bradystraps
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:50 am
- Name: Todd
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Personally, I want to like the Tudor more. I like the vintage feel of the rivet bracelet and, generally speaking, I don't like the faux-vintage of artificially aged lume (this is a general statement, not a knock specifically against the Omega).
That said, I find diving chronographs a bit of an odd duck combination. I only own a single automatic chronograph movement watch so my opinion probably isn't too valid, but I time stuff a lot (presentations at work, food and kid stuff at home, etc.). Normally I use the rotating bezel on my dive watch, but with the chronograph I'll use that function.
With screw down pushers (I'm assuming necessary to achieve the water resistance rating) I don't think I'd use the chronograph feature all that often. I'd end up with an expensive 2 hand watch with extra features I never use. I'd be curious to know what the water resistance was of the watch with the screws in the "open" position.
For my purposes, I'd rather have only 100m water resistance and no screw down pushers. I'd isn't a dive watch. No need to make it one.
That said, I find diving chronographs a bit of an odd duck combination. I only own a single automatic chronograph movement watch so my opinion probably isn't too valid, but I time stuff a lot (presentations at work, food and kid stuff at home, etc.). Normally I use the rotating bezel on my dive watch, but with the chronograph I'll use that function.
With screw down pushers (I'm assuming necessary to achieve the water resistance rating) I don't think I'd use the chronograph feature all that often. I'd end up with an expensive 2 hand watch with extra features I never use. I'd be curious to know what the water resistance was of the watch with the screws in the "open" position.
For my purposes, I'd rather have only 100m water resistance and no screw down pushers. I'd isn't a dive watch. No need to make it one.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Useful is never my prerequisite...lol. I go based on how stuff looks and whether i dig the dial layout etc. Shit i rarely even use the chrono functions on any of mine..
I do love the matching date wheel on the omega as well as the 2 hand chrono register at 3pm. I had that on another Omega and loved that set up. Damn tough choice as i really dig both. The rivet bracelet i could live without though....With they didnt do that, not sure what it is that bothers me about it. That said i would still buy it on bracelet if i get the BB.
- rockmastermike
- Feedback Virtuoso
- Posts: 20573
- Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:13 pm
- Name: WDE
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Love the Tudor but hate screwdown pushers - one of the reasons I sold my Daytona. I don’t use the Chrono for much but like to activate it without taking it off my wrist to unscrew the pushers - that’s just me
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Screwdown pushers are a deal-breaker for me, no matter the price point. It's why I'm selling my 103 and why I don't want an AP RO chronograph (but like the 26400).Ryeguy wrote:Personally, I want to like the Tudor more. I like the vintage feel of the rivet bracelet and, generally speaking, I don't like the faux-vintage of artificially aged lume (this is a general statement, not a knock specifically against the Omega).
That said, I find diving chronographs a bit of an odd duck combination. I only own a single automatic chronograph movement watch so my opinion probably isn't too valid, but I time stuff a lot (presentations at work, food and kid stuff at home, etc.). Normally I use the rotating bezel on my dive watch, but with the chronograph I'll use that function.
With screw down pushers (I'm assuming necessary to achieve the water resistance rating) I don't think I'd use the chronograph feature all that often. I'd end up with an expensive 2 hand watch with extra features I never use. I'd be curious to know what the water resistance was of the watch with the screws in the "open" position.
For my purposes, I'd rather have only 100m water resistance and no screw down pushers. I'd isn't a dive watch. No need to make it one.
Omega's SMP and PO chronographs are reliable and proven dive chronos that are non-screwdown.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
+1 on the screwdown pushers, but as far as the Omega, I've tried twice with 'vintage' indice/hand colors and although great in pictures, it is less than satisfying in person after 72 hrs... I'm not a real WIS tho, YMMVrockmastermike wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:35 amLove the Tudor but hate screwdown pushers - one of the reasons I sold my Daytona. I don’t use the Chrono for much but like to activate it without taking it off my wrist to unscrew the pushers - that’s just me
VR/
Paul
SI VI PACEM, PARA BELLUM
Paul
SI VI PACEM, PARA BELLUM
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
I just tried on the ‘57 at the Omega boutique here and I walked away wanting to grab it soon. It is much more blingy in person than I thought it would be, but it works. The bracelet is outstanding too.
Sent from your mom’s house.
Sent from your mom’s house.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
I don't mind the screw down pushers, but I'd like the Tudor more if they'd ditched the black bay hands and large crown. And I think it's a "dive chrono" in name only. It's nice that it has a 200m WR, but I have a hard time calling a chronograph with a tachy scale a dive watch.
Always liked the looks of that Omega, but I imagine it's on the thick side.
Always liked the looks of that Omega, but I imagine it's on the thick side.
- logan2z
- IT Admin
- Posts: 11743
- Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:08 am
- Name: Andrew
- Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
The latest iteratiion of the AP RO Chronograph does not have screw down pushers, although they've retained the look of the screw down pushers for aesthetic reasons.matt.wu wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:38 amScrewdown pushers are a deal-breaker for me, no matter the price point. It's why I'm selling my 103 and why I don't want an AP RO chronograph (but like the 26400).Ryeguy wrote:Personally, I want to like the Tudor more. I like the vintage feel of the rivet bracelet and, generally speaking, I don't like the faux-vintage of artificially aged lume (this is a general statement, not a knock specifically against the Omega).
That said, I find diving chronographs a bit of an odd duck combination. I only own a single automatic chronograph movement watch so my opinion probably isn't too valid, but I time stuff a lot (presentations at work, food and kid stuff at home, etc.). Normally I use the rotating bezel on my dive watch, but with the chronograph I'll use that function.
With screw down pushers (I'm assuming necessary to achieve the water resistance rating) I don't think I'd use the chronograph feature all that often. I'd end up with an expensive 2 hand watch with extra features I never use. I'd be curious to know what the water resistance was of the watch with the screws in the "open" position.
For my purposes, I'd rather have only 100m water resistance and no screw down pushers. I'd isn't a dive watch. No need to make it one.
Omega's SMP and PO chronographs are reliable and proven dive chronos that are non-screwdown.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
That's kind of my point. Having the screw down pushers with the tachy scale is an odd combo. Pick one or the other.JBZ wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:45 amI don't mind the screw down pushers, but I'd like the Tudor more if they'd ditched the black bay hands and large crown. And I think it's a "dive chrono" in name only. It's nice that it has a 200m WR, but I have a hard time calling a chronograph with a tachy scale a dive watch.
Always liked the looks of that Omega, but I imagine it's on the thick side.
Ultimately, though, I think these are more style decisions rather than functional decisions.
Heck, I really like the looks of the Alpina Alpiner Chrono
Photo credit to GMT minus five
This odd duck has no tachy scale, a GMT scale printed on the rehaut, and compass headings printed on the bezel insert. Makes no sense to me, but I like it.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Absolutely, and screw down pushers have been a Daytona feature since forever, though some pre-Zenith Daytonas had the option of non-screw downs. So Tudor is just (unsurprisingly) following a Rolex design.Ryeguy wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:16 amThat's kind of my point. Having the screw down pushers with the tachy scale is an odd combo. Pick one or the other.JBZ wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:45 amI don't mind the screw down pushers, but I'd like the Tudor more if they'd ditched the black bay hands and large crown. And I think it's a "dive chrono" in name only. It's nice that it has a 200m WR, but I have a hard time calling a chronograph with a tachy scale a dive watch.
Always liked the looks of that Omega, but I imagine it's on the thick side.
Ultimately, though, I think these are more style decisions rather than functional decisions.
But, like you said, it's ultimately a matter of taste. I like the looks of the screw-downs. Lots of folks don't.
On edit: and on the chronographs I've owned, I hardly ever use the timing feature, screw downs or not. I just think they look cool.
- Joeprez
- Wants to see pics of your wife
- Posts: 13850
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 5:36 am
- Name: Joe
- Location: Puerto Rico
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
I prefer the Speedy, I understand the fauxlume is not very popular but I love everything else.
I have two design issues with the Tudor: the snowflake hand takes too much real estate for a Chronograph and I don't think the round lume pots look good on that watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have two design issues with the Tudor: the snowflake hand takes too much real estate for a Chronograph and I don't think the round lume pots look good on that watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Omega / Tudor / Rolex / Sinn / Doxa / Seiko
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
logan2z wrote:The latest iteratiion of the AP RO Chronograph does not have screw down pushers, although they've retained the look of the screw down pushers for aesthetic reasons.matt.wu wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:38 amScrewdown pushers are a deal-breaker for me, no matter the price point. It's why I'm selling my 103 and why I don't want an AP RO chronograph (but like the 26400).Ryeguy wrote:Personally, I want to like the Tudor more. I like the vintage feel of the rivet bracelet and, generally speaking, I don't like the faux-vintage of artificially aged lume (this is a general statement, not a knock specifically against the Omega).
That said, I find diving chronographs a bit of an odd duck combination. I only own a single automatic chronograph movement watch so my opinion probably isn't too valid, but I time stuff a lot (presentations at work, food and kid stuff at home, etc.). Normally I use the rotating bezel on my dive watch, but with the chronograph I'll use that function.
With screw down pushers (I'm assuming necessary to achieve the water resistance rating) I don't think I'd use the chronograph feature all that often. I'd end up with an expensive 2 hand watch with extra features I never use. I'd be curious to know what the water resistance was of the watch with the screws in the "open" position.
For my purposes, I'd rather have only 100m water resistance and no screw down pushers. I'd isn't a dive watch. No need to make it one.
Omega's SMP and PO chronographs are reliable and proven dive chronos that are non-screwdown.
I do still prefer the 26400, but that's good to know.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Yup, there is no wrong decision with those Eric ! No matter which one you go
with, you can always add the other down the road too, and enjoy seeing both in
the collection. Has to be insane, but ridiculously fun just comparing the two
I bet !
with, you can always add the other down the road too, and enjoy seeing both in
the collection. Has to be insane, but ridiculously fun just comparing the two
I bet !
- logan2z
- IT Admin
- Posts: 11743
- Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 1:08 am
- Name: Andrew
- Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
I like it too but (and I can't believe I'm saying this) I think I'd prefer it if it were 42mm. It's a lot of watch and wears pretty big on my wrist.matt.wu wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:55 amlogan2z wrote:The latest iteratiion of the AP RO Chronograph does not have screw down pushers, although they've retained the look of the screw down pushers for aesthetic reasons.matt.wu wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:38 amScrewdown pushers are a deal-breaker for me, no matter the price point. It's why I'm selling my 103 and why I don't want an AP RO chronograph (but like the 26400).Ryeguy wrote:Personally, I want to like the Tudor more. I like the vintage feel of the rivet bracelet and, generally speaking, I don't like the faux-vintage of artificially aged lume (this is a general statement, not a knock specifically against the Omega).
That said, I find diving chronographs a bit of an odd duck combination. I only own a single automatic chronograph movement watch so my opinion probably isn't too valid, but I time stuff a lot (presentations at work, food and kid stuff at home, etc.). Normally I use the rotating bezel on my dive watch, but with the chronograph I'll use that function.
With screw down pushers (I'm assuming necessary to achieve the water resistance rating) I don't think I'd use the chronograph feature all that often. I'd end up with an expensive 2 hand watch with extra features I never use. I'd be curious to know what the water resistance was of the watch with the screws in the "open" position.
For my purposes, I'd rather have only 100m water resistance and no screw down pushers. I'd isn't a dive watch. No need to make it one.
Omega's SMP and PO chronographs are reliable and proven dive chronos that are non-screwdown.
I do still prefer the 26400, but that's good to know.
- jeckyll
- Honorary Assistant Jr. Hall Monitor in Training
- Posts: 11921
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:11 pm
- Name: Björn
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
They're both great looking watches, with the Tudor being just a touch more sporty. I think if the watch has a screw down crown, screw down pushers make sense. They don't bother me much, I have watches both with and without.
For my money, I'd pick the Tudor
For my money, I'd pick the Tudor
We all have the same enemy. The enemy is the tyranny of the dull mind. - - Tom Robbins
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
I can't get over how awkward the BB Chrono looks – just looks too much like a fan-made mashup, and not in a good way. Whereas that Speedy is a pretty awesome modern interpretation of a classic (this is the Speedmaster's Seamaster 300, I'd argue), is a strap monster, looks the tits, and is WR to 100 meters without screwdown pushers.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
get both wear for a while and flip the one you don't like here....
separate note... I saw your farer and went into their website and saw their Cobb chrono... I don't know why but something in my brain is telling me I need something with a blue dial.
separate note... I saw your farer and went into their website and saw their Cobb chrono... I don't know why but something in my brain is telling me I need something with a blue dial.
-
- Posts: 498
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 1:57 pm
- Name: Paul
- Location: Arkansas
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Have you checked out the new speedmaster racing chronos? They are worth taking a look at if you are in the market for a two register chrono. They are not as crazy big as the 44.25 sounds. New prices seem a bit much, but I've seen some used ones available for less than 5 grand.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
Omega gets my vote out of those two but I’ve got Speedy fever right now so take that for what it’s worth. Also, the Black bays just feel too blocky for what they are imo.
Re: Thinking about next purchase.
no, never heard, ill have a quick search online!shaneotool wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 1:15 pmHave you checked out the new speedmaster racing chronos? They are worth taking a look at if you are in the market for a two register chrono. They are not as crazy big as the 44.25 sounds. New prices seem a bit much, but I've seen some used ones available for less than 5 grand.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: DaveT, DocHollidayDDS, Emeister, ezcheese, mfxr, mstewart, pbj204, petethegreek and 225 guests