Question Re: Omega PO 2500 D vs. C

[logan2z]

The 2500 also has more design cues from the old school SM300, which I prefer.

+1

[GregBe]

Just went through this EXACT same dilemma. I waited for a D. If you are anything like me, and since you even asked the question...I am guessing you are, if you go with the C (even though odds are you will be fine) you will always wonder/wish you had waited for a D. And you know as soon as you purchase a C, a D will pop up on Watchrecon

[toxicavenger]

Just went through this EXACT same dilemma. I waited for a D. If you are anything like me, and since you even asked the question...I am guessing you are, if you go with the C (even though odds are you will be fine) you will always wonder/wish you had waited for a D. And you know as soon as you purchase a C, a D will pop up on Watchrecon

sounds like debating what size titties to buy a wife

[GregBe]

Just went through this EXACT same dilemma. I waited for a D. If you are anything like me, and since you even asked the question...I am guessing you are, if you go with the C (even though odds are you will be fine) you will always wonder/wish you had waited for a D. And you know as soon as you purchase a C, a D will pop up on Watchrecon

sounds like debating what size titties to buy a wife

That is too freakin' funny. I re-read what I wrote with your comment in my head, and laughed my ass off!

[smalls]

I know it's not even a question for you but I really have found that I prefer the chunkier 8500. I think the key is to find that perfect fit on the bracelet. Omega kills themselves with no micro adjustments but if you have the right size wrist then it really is an outstanding piece that stands above its 2500 sibling. One knock I will give the 8500 though is the applied numbers are essentially useless. In most lighting instances they disappear completely. I sometimes wish I would have gone with the orange numerals which aren't affected the same way.

I like that there's more color on the 8500 and the grey bezel which some hate is actually a nice change of pace in a collection of largely black bezeled divers. The larger hands make it easy to look at at a glance and the 8500 movement itself has proven to be quite impressive. I find myself looking in the watch box after a couple of days surprised to see the Omega still ticking right along waiting on me to just put it on the wrist and go. There's no wrong choice but for anyone else looking I wouldn't dismiss the 8500 until trying one out.

[BBK357]

[falcon4311]

I know it's not even a question for you but I really have found that I prefer the chunkier 8500. I think the key is to find that perfect fit on the bracelet. Omega kills themselves with no micro adjustments but if you have the right size wrist then it really is an outstanding piece that stands above its 2500 sibling. One knock I will give the 8500 though is the applied numbers are essentially useless. In most lighting instances they disappear completely. I sometimes wish I would have gone with the orange numerals which aren't affected the same way.

I like that there's more color on the 8500 and the grey bezel which some hate is actually a nice change of pace in a collection of largely black bezeled divers. The larger hands make it easy to look at at a glance and the 8500 movement itself has proven to be quite impressive. I find myself looking in the watch box after a couple of days surprised to see the Omega still ticking right along waiting on me to just put it on the wrist and go. There's no wrong choice but for anyone else looking I wouldn't dismiss the 8500 until trying one out.

[Jeep99dad]

Love it on rubber

[Jeep99dad]

I may have to go try on a 8500 just to be 100%

[jimyritz]

miss this 8500...





Mike

[dnslater]

Late to this thread, but my "C" stopped after 4 1/2 years and wouldn't budge. Sent it to Nesbits, and surprisingly they said it already had the fix. Seems like the movement is very susceptible to getting gummed up with oils. I do strongly prefer the size of the 2500 over the 8500.

[Jeep99dad]

My old 2500 D and 8500 from a few years ago

[Panerai7]

I found the thread I was looking for on TRF, shows very well the difference in dimensions

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=247254

[TimelessLuxWatches]

I prefer the 8500 myself. As soon as it came out in 2007 I knew I had to have one. But that said, there are some other subtle improvements in the 2500. The date change is much faster, for instance.

I think the good news is that the 2500D is still fully supported and used by Omega, so parts and service are going to be available for it for a long time yet.

As an aside, I kind of think that Omega has re-released an Aqua Terra 2500 (with an 8500-based movement), the Aqua Terra Good Planet:

http://cdn.watchbase.com/watch/original ... 001-c2.jpg

Blued everything, no more teak.

Here's the "original":

http://i955.photobucket.com/albums/ae35 ... SWUS09.jpg

Maybe the AT is coming full circle.

[hoppyjr]

Late to this thread, but my "C" stopped after 4 1/2 years and wouldn't budge. Sent it to Nesbits, and surprisingly they said it already had the fix. Seems like the movement is very susceptible to getting gummed up with oils. I do strongly prefer the size of the 2500 over the 8500.

It must somehow be relevant to the co-axial mechanism, because I understand the base movement is based off of the ETA 2892 and it doesn't have stoppage issues.

Kind of ironic that the co-axial is supposed to extend service intervals, yet it stops sooner than a 2892 would.

[jeckyll]

Just one observation, based on the number of folks who reported having problems with the 2500C, I doubt it was a very small isolated problem. Or we have a tremendously skewed distribution...

[dnslater]

Late to this thread, but my "C" stopped after 4 1/2 years and wouldn't budge. Sent it to Nesbits, and surprisingly they said it already had the fix. Seems like the movement is very susceptible to getting gummed up with oils. I do strongly prefer the size of the 2500 over the 8500.

It must somehow be relevant to the co-axial mechanism, because I understand the base movement is based off of the ETA 2892 and it doesn't have stoppage issues.

Kind of ironic that the co-axial is supposed to extend service intervals, yet it stops sooner than a 2892 would.

I recall reading that the Daniels escapement is designed to be largely oil free, and Omega heavily lubed the 2500C as they didn't trust this - and it caused issues.

[JP Chestnut]

Just one observation, based on the number of folks who reported having problems with the 2500C, I doubt it was a very small isolated problem. Or we have a tremendously skewed distribution...

What we lack in people, we make up for in random draws. When some member's have owned 10 of these, we might be converging to the true distribution. It was obviously prevalent enough for Omega to do something about.

[hoppyjr]

Late to this thread, but my "C" stopped after 4 1/2 years and wouldn't budge. Sent it to Nesbits, and surprisingly they said it already had the fix. Seems like the movement is very susceptible to getting gummed up with oils. I do strongly prefer the size of the 2500 over the 8500.

It must somehow be relevant to the co-axial mechanism, because I understand the base movement is based off of the ETA 2892 and it doesn't have stoppage issues.

Kind of ironic that the co-axial is supposed to extend service intervals, yet it stops sooner than a 2892 would.

I recall reading that the Daniels escapement is designed to be largely oil free, and Omega heavily lubed the 2500C as they didn't trust this - and it caused issues.

This would make sense. I'm gonna do a bit of research.

[1watchaholic]

While fresh on the topic...how do you tell if you have a C or D? I know there is a thread somewhere but a nice Readers Digest response would be appreciated. I have a 2500 and I've never had problems with it regardless of C or D and I think I've had it 4-5 years. But I'd like to know. I thought about upgrading to the 8500 but I like the lower profile better of the 2500 as I often wear it with long sleeved shirts.

[hoppyjr]

While fresh on the topic...how do you tell if you have a C or D? I know there is a thread somewhere but a nice Readers Digest response would be appreciated. I have a 2500 and I've never had problems with it regardless of C or D and I think I've had it 4-5 years. But I'd like to know. I thought about upgrading to the 8500 but I like the lower profile better of the 2500 as I often wear it with long sleeved shirts.

The easiest way is to look at the date wheel. The b/c versions have a straight 1, whereas the d has a little flag on the tip of the 1

[JP Chestnut]

While fresh on the topic...how do you tell if you have a C or D? I know there is a thread somewhere but a nice Readers Digest response would be appreciated. I have a 2500 and I've never had problems with it regardless of C or D and I think I've had it 4-5 years. But I'd like to know. I thought about upgrading to the 8500 but I like the lower profile better of the 2500 as I often wear it with long sleeved shirts.

The date font is different. The one in a C is more "l", while in the D it's more similar to "1". There's also a bit more detailing on the date window on the D. You can also Google search the approximate serial number when the D's started. Mine is 861XXXX and one of the last 2500D's produced.

If anyone wants a picture of a particular date on the D, let me know.

[BBK357]

[1watchaholic]

Thanks! Now that's clear!

[BBK357]

Of course that's not my pic, found on the vast World Wide Web.