WATCH POP

  Home Page  |  Page Map|

Watch-Pop



Planet ocean Vs Seamaster

Hey guys,

Was just thinking of getting an omega to add to the collection and i just have a few questions.

Which is the better watch?

What are the pros/ cons of each?

Does anyone think that the seamaster is looking dated and would it be worth paying more for the planet ocean? (Regardless of mechanism)

Is the new bond watch going to be the Planet ocean??

Thanks for your help in advance
Answer:
What are the pros/ cons of each?

The Seamaster is $1250 cheaper, has the same basic movement but without the co-axial escapement, and lacks the scratch-prone anti-reflective coating on the outside of the crystal. It also has a bracelet that has both brushed and polished surfaces, while the Planet Ocean's bracelet is all brushed (the look is purely a matter of personal preference). The Planet Ocean has the upgraded co-axial escapement, twice the depth rating (if you are in need of diving 600 meters, and higher quality applied dial markers.


Does anyone think that the seamaster is looking dated and would it be worth paying more for the planet ocean? (Regardless of mechanism)

No, I think that both the current Seamasters and the Planet Ocean (in black) all have a timeless look to them.


Is the new bond watch going to be the Planet ocean??

We won't know until sometime after the Basel Fair in April.
Answer:
Hello Teeth Man.
I see your dilemma. I feel that you need to really appreciate a watch before you even think to purchase one.
Do some research and then come back to me.
Regards,
Richard
Answer:
Hello Richard,

I do appreciate watches, that is why I have a few. I didn't like the tone of your reply, you seem as if you have a hierarchy on watch knowledge compared to others on your first post. I just need help regarding which one to buy next. All the research done and I am finally down to 2.

Teeth Man
Answer:
I've got both the SMP 2254.50 and an Orange 42 mm PO. Both are great watches for the money, but if I were to have only one it would be the PO, albeit perhaps a black one, mostly because the PO just feels like a more expensive, substantial piece which it is on both counts. No surprise there, I suppose. Each has it's advantages: the SMP is thinner and I like the bracelet a little more, but not by much. The PO has a more attractive dial imho and I like the smaller numerals on the basel. It is, however, a thicker watch. I've gotten more complements on the PO.

My guess would be that if you can afford it, in the long run you will like the PO better. As always, my suggestion is that you try both on. I'm sure at that point the heavens will open and you'll have your answer.
Answer:
I prefer the P.O. - It just appears, to me anyway, a Nicer Watch. No better or worse, but add the Co-Axial Escapement and you also get " Unique ". No one else has it. I have the 45.5 Orange Model. Either way - there is no Wrong Decision - Both are Fine Watches!

Ron
Answer:
I think I've said this before, but there are things about both watches I like, so I wish I could pick and choose my favorite things and make one "perfect" watch from both of them.

The Planet Ocean:
1) Co-axial movement
2) Applied dial markers
3) Arrow hands
4) Sawtooth bezel with lower profile numbers

The Seamaster 2254.50:
1) Wave pattern dial
2) Brushed/polished Speedy-style bracelet
3) Lack of outer anti-reflective coating on crystal

Add a see-through sapphire caseback and I'd have my ideal watch.

I can see how this would be a tough decision, especially if you can afford either watch. Good luck.
Answer:
which seamaster are you referring to?

Technically the Planet Ocean itself is a type of Seamaster, as are the Aqua Terras and the 300m's. Perhaps I'm too new to the Omega scene, but is there a certain Seamaster that you guys simply refer to as the "Seamaster"?

Regardless, I recently picked up the Planet Ocean 45.5mm (in Orange), definitely have no regrets. :o)
Answer:
Sorry for the confusion, though the original poster didn't specify a particular Seamaster model.

We consider the regular "Seamaster" to be the typical 1120 caliber models like the Bond 2531.80 and the black face 2254.50. In this case, since the original poster was comparing the "Seamaster" to a Planet Ocean, I assumed he was comparing the 2254.50 black dial Seamaster to that watch.

Answer:
the Planet Ocean would be much nicer if it were not for the pointed hands imho.
Answer:
I would buy that watch in an instant! The only detail that I would change is the arrow hands. I prefer the sword hands of the SMP. Also, I absolutely need the GMT function, and I would prefer it with the 24 hour scale on the bezel as opposed to on the dial. I am hoping Omega will unveil a PO GMT at Basel, but I am guessing it will be the same configuration as the current Bond/DeVille GMT (since they all have the Co-axial movement). A wider variety of dial/bezel combinations would be nice too! Sigh... "It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat." - Theodore Roosevelt
Answer:
In December I purchased my first Omega, a Seamaster 300M GMT Co-Axial with the blue dial, 2535.80.00, and absolutely love it. A couple of observations of my GMT:

1. It is thicker and heavier than the "regular" Seamaster 300M
2. The dial has greater detail than the "regular" Seamaster 300M
3. Compared to the PO, has the GMT function, but is about the same price as the PO.
4. A smaller case (41mm) than either PO.

That said, I think the PO is a future classic. While I bought the GMT co-Axial, I plan to get a PO one day.
Breitling Navatimer, Omega SeMP Co-Axial GMT, Panerai PAM 111 J, N.B Yaeger Longflight, Sinn U1, Zodiac Calame Classique Chronograph, Zodiac Calame Sport Chronograph, Xemex Avenue Chronograph, Citizen Promaster Aqualand II
Answer:


Comparing the classical bond (1120 based) with the PO I would prefer the PO because of its co-axial calibre (but beware of big price difference), but, as Sean F pointed, the comparison between the PO & the Bond GMT coaxial is, for me, a different story. Buying the SMP GMT coaxial, for the same money, you get over the PO:
1) Sapphire back
2) wave-pattern dial
3) GMT function
4) Skeleton hands (I like them much more than arrow ones, evenmore, I think that the hands of the PO are to much long)
5) Anti-reflective coating only on the inside (I do also prefer this over the inner & outer coating, prone to scratch, of the PO, but I will admit that a lot of/almost_all people think that the PO is superior here)
6) Nicer brushed/polished bracelet
& you will miss the 600m depth rating. For me the 45mm PO is too much big &, on the wrist, the SMP GMT coax looks sligthly bigger than the 42mm PO.

In any case, you cannot make a mistake buying any ot them (including the "plain" 1120 based Bond). Greetings.
Answer:
While the PO has a very big following here, I just can't warm to it's looks. I've tried on both black and orange POs in both sizes, but just don't find them attractive. On the other hand, I love the looks of my Bond and Bond chrono. The POs just don't do it for me.
Answer:
Owning, among many others, a SS/18K Bond, a 45.5mm PO, and a Non-AC Seamaster, I can unequivocally say the PO is the "future" of Omega. The watch, IMHO, is an instant classic, fit and finish are tremendous, and it is a very comfortable watch for it's size (I had a Black 45.5 and now have an Orange 45.5).

This is by far the best "sports" watch Omega has produced, and when taking into account the inclusion of the co-axial movement, this is the one I would by.

That said, if you are concerned about size, and timelessness of your purchase there are a number of SMP that you should look at.

For example:









realistically they are all available for less than 1/2 of retail and are fantastic watches in there own right, but that being said, buy the watch that speaks to you....not the one that we think is better, or the one that James Bond wears....since you will regret it sooner or later.

Cheers,

jdm "It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow." - Robert H. Goddard
Answer:
thanks for the heads up!
Answer:
Thanks mcesar for noting the display back. This is one of the best features of the Bond GMT Co-Axial. You are right about the Bond GMT Co-Axial wearing bigger than what one would expect from a 41mm. Breitling Navatimer, Omega SeMP Co-Axial GMT, Panerai PAM 111 J, N.B Yaeger Longflight, Sinn U1, Zodiac Calame Classique Chronograph, Zodiac Calame Sport Chronograph, Xemex Avenue Chronograph, Citizen Promaster Aqualand II
Answer:
The PO arrow hands just don't do it for me, and the PO case is just too tall, thick and chunky for my tastes. I like the SeMP's more subtle presence, and its brushed/polished bracelet and case add just a little sparkle while keeping in touch with the 'tool watch' aesthete. The SeMP also dresses up surprisingly well for a sport watch, which is a little tougher to do with the outsized PO in my opinion.

Antoher thing I really don't like about the PO is that there's not a lot of reason for the case to be quite so chunky since the movements are the same size. Of course, some more size is needed for the increased water resistance, but 300m is more than I'll ever need for a variety of reasons. Most of the PO's size is just for styling IMHO, and since I don't much fancy the styling it's easy for me to pass up.

That being said, I am a little envious of the co-axial c.2500C in the PO. The AR coating has already been touched on, and I agree with the others that the double coating isn't something I like.

Overall, the SeMP provides more value for the price, more bang for the buck to me than the PO. I wouldn't go for the PO unless you're really looking for that big, chunky look, which is admittedly becoming fashionable.

-r "Mechanical watches are so brilliantly unnecessary. Any Swatch or Casio keeps better time, and high-end contemporary Swiss watches are priced like small cars. But mechanical watches partake of what my friend John Clute calls the Tamagotchi Gesture. They're pointless in a peculiarly needful way; they're comforting precisely because they require tending." - WG
How old is my vintage Omega? - Omega Serial Numbers by Year
Answer:
John, your taste is exactly the same as mine, as you've described my perfect watch -- a combination of the best traits from the PO and the 2254.50


In fact, I'd be satisfied with the existing 2254.50's size and thickness (not too large or thick) and simply have the nicer applied dial markers and a different bezel numbers, not as thick font as standard 2254, a thinner font like PO.

I hope to see some updated Seamasters after Basel 06.
Other OMEGA Quiz:
My Speedmaster Date 3513.30 Gains about 46seconds/day?
They went on the moon?
OT: Speedmaster Pro in Alaska?
Need some clarification.?
Need help on the Omega Seamaster Chrono Regatta.?
Omega Seamaster GMT in Hong Kong?