Watches

0 readers

1 users here now

A community for watch & horology discussion.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

communick@style.land

[Omega Speedmaster] Are Omegas poorly engineered compared to other brands? (alien.top)

submitted 1 year ago by Turin_Laundromat@alien.top to c/watches@style.land

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm new to watches and I wanted my first to be an Omega. I like them because of immature reasons like the moon thing and the James Bond thing, but after looking into them for a couple of days I see that they have low reserves compared to other brands. Rolex Submariner has 70 hours, and even the much lower-priced Tudor Black Bay has 70 hours, while Speedmaster and Seamaster come in at 50-55 hours. It seems like that's an indication of worse design and engineering. Or, if not, what am I missing?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] p33k4y@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

My advice is never to buy watches based on specs. Controversially for this forum: not even accuracy specs.

55hr vs 72hr reserves. 100m vs. 200m water resistance. 21,600 vph vs 28,800 vph. +2s vs. +20s per day accuracy.

None of them mean anything in isolation. Don't get me wrong... know these specifications, but they're all just one factor among many, and mostly determined by marketing needs.

You'll see people literally posting stuff like, "I wont consider that watch because it's only water rated to 100m" when in reality the watch will never even get near a swimming pool.

Buy watches because you like them as a whole, not because of a particular spec.