zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

: Hi John

: How can you say that PO is "rugged"
: when it was never used a real dive watch by
: a professional team or a company and when
: its movement has never been tested over the
: very long run???? The sub and sea dweller
: are rugged sportswatches.The sub was
: launched in 1953 and the sea dweller in 1967
: bothe were part of the comex equipment from
: 1971 till 1998. I don't consider a product
: from hayek's marketing hype as a
: "rugged" sports watch but a dress
: diver with zero concrete feedback regarding
: its ruggedness.

: regards

: georges

Georges, I'm confused as to why you come to this forum when all you seem to do is slag off modern Omega watches. I have read your past posts where you mention that you have an early 1950s Omega that runs perfectly and that Omega's ETA movements these days aren't as good as Omega's in-house movements from days gone by, I have read your past posts where you mention that Rolex SeaDwellers were used by Comex divers and I have read your past posts where you warn us all that the Co-Axial movement is not a tried and tested movement.
If I didn't know any better, I would think that you do not like Omega watches. I respect your knowledge of Rolex movements. You know a lot about them. However, I'm sure you would know that while Rolex was supplying Comex with SeaDwellers back in the early '70s, Omega was supplying British Navy divers with the classic Seamaster 300. I realise that the Planet Ocean has only been available for less than a year, so it cannot have "been tested over the very long run", but how will we know if it is a good or bad watch if we don't give it the time to 'sink or swim'?
I work in a boutique wristwatch store and whenever somebody walks in wearing a Rolex, I ask them what they think of the watch. Half of them say it's the best watch they've ever had and the other half say it's the worst watch they've ever had. I have heard stories of poor time-keeping from the day they bought it and constant returns to Rolex under warranty for repairs and still the watch comes back running just as bad. In some cases, the warranty period expires and these customers are left with a watch that has not been repaired to their satisfaction. I have seen this happen with various brands. Don't get me wrong, Georges, I think Rolex make a great watch. If I ever have the money one day, I will get myself a pre-1983 Submariner 5513. But I'm just a working-class guy and I find it hard to justify paying such a high price for a Rolex Sub/Seadweller (brand new) when an Omega Seamaster/Planet Ocean does the same thing except for the in-house movement. I don't find it necessary for a watch to have an in-house movement. As long as the watch runs accurately and doesn't cost mega-bucks to service, then that's all I ask. After all, various other brands such as IWC and Breitling use ETA base-calibre movements.
And as for Rolex making a true dive watch because it was used by a professional dive company, well I don't think any professional dive company these days issues their divers with an expensive dive watch. Most divers I have met tend to wear a Seiko or Citizen dive watch when they actually dive.
Besides, I don't think Hayek or Omega would be foolish enough to produce a dive watch that wasn't rugged enough for daily use among us 'desk divers'. But if you say that Rolex produce the only true dive watch, then you are excluding every other brand that has ever produced a dive watch that was actually used by divers. Like I said, I like Rolex watches, but they aren't the only watch out there.
Just my 2c.

teeritz