Omega or Rolex?

[Adam]

Log in to vote for your favourite brand and post a reason why.

Webmaster

[elmslie]

Quite simply Omega watches are better timekeepers.
I've owned 3 Rolex watches and 2 Omega watches in the past.
Rolex watches gain (on average) between 7/12 secs a day; Omega gain around 4/5 secs a day.

[BrianEaston]

An ongoing comparison with many different views.
I prefer to think although a Rolex is generally twice the price of the equivalent Omega: it is not twice as good a watch.

[Sarge]

While I voted for Rolex, I really can't take a liking to either brand.  I owned a Rolex Submariner, that was made in the early 70s, and it was a good watch until someone broke into my locker at work (you can't wear watches, rings, or necklaces on a military flight line) and stole the watch.  The watch was moderately accurate, within a minute or so a day (as set with the atomic clock signal via high frequency radio), but I thought that a watch that I paid almost $800for should be more accurate than that.  After that, I bought an Omega, reduced size chronometer, and that was the most absolute piece of garbage, in any class of commodity, that I have ever owned.  I have NEVER in my life been more dissatisfied with a product.
     I bought a Fortis watch when I got rid of the Omega.  Now I know, I seem to have been going downhill in brand quality.  BUT...the Fortis keeps time to within a few minutes a week, has NEVER quit working, has never had a pusher fall off the watch, like many had on the Omega, and I have worn this watch while swimming, bicycling (where the constant vibration of the road comes up through the bike), in the shower, and even on the firing line, shooting .50 caliber machine guns, which is like using a jackhammer.  This watch has no great style, and the brand offers the wearer no "panache", but I would buy a hundred Fortis watches before one of either Omega or Rolex

[Guest]

Well I went on a Rolex chat room about 2 years ago and asked the same question. One guy e-mailed to tell me that Rolex are not worth twice the price of an Omega. I ended up buying an Omega Seamaster and I am well pleased with it-but it hasn't stopped me looking at Rolexes.
One further thought-a friend of mine has just had his serviced and a re-con bracelet put on. The total cost was £1,100! The same price of a new Omega Seamaster.

[Anonymous]

subjective question, if you want to have a watch that is bullet proof, well proven and made 'in house' whose mvmnts are exclusive only to them , then no question Rolex is far the better choice.
As for accuracy the lubrication method used in eta mvmnts  especially the 2892 A is what helps to give it chronometer status, after five yrs it will definately be off the pace, not so with a Rolex. Trying to convince yourselves as to the best ( I am talking diving watches here ) wont alter the fact Rolex is a better product.
You only have look around to see many other watch companies prices rocketing on the back of perceived quality. Rolex didnt get to their position in the market by offering crap, I have held the Mercedes Glietz watch, and the bathyscape watch, history in the making.

[Anonymous]

What is good accuracy ? 7 secs a day, everyday is exceptional, when it comes to mechanical watches consistency is the word , not whether it keeps up with the atomic clock.