Thread: submariner vs seamaster

I picked up a submariner last week. Thought I would get your opinions on this ubiquitous watch to the seamaster.

I am a noob to watch. Not a collector so my watches are for daily wear. Have to be functional in all conditions (dive, shower, hot tube, snowboarding etc).

Quality - Seamaster wins
- Seamaster is about 25% heavier than the Sub
- Bracelet is sturdier on the Seamaster than the Sub. Sub bracelet stretches more.
- Glass is thicker and domed on the Seamaster.
- Bezel rotates much easier and more positively on the Sub.

Looks - Seamaster wins
- Seamaster has a lot more details on the bracelet, caseback, dials.
- Sub has more details on the crown, bezel.
- Seamaster is a little bigger

Time keeping
- To be determined

Comfort - Rolex wins
- Sub is lighter and more comfortable

Ease of Use - Rolex wins
- Crown is much bigger on the Sub, making time adjustments much easier to complete when screwing the crown back. The spring loaded action on the crown is really nice.
- Seamaster hands are bigger, easier to tell time

Cost - Seamaster wins
- Sub is about 3x more of a Seamaster

All this leads the Seamaster to be a better value. The Rolex is a better watch given it's more comfortable to wear and use. It isn't as rugged based on my limited use but I could be wrong.

Please chime in on your thoughts. Would you keep both watches or should I sell one of them? I have a hard time letting go of the Seamaster given it's such a good value and has served my needs for last 14 years.

I'm a big fan of the sub. Do you like switching up wearing watches or are you content wearing just the Seamaster for example?

Was this a traditional Submariner or Ceramic Submariner?

ahh good question

Originally Posted by CUBIX

Was this a traditional Submariner or Ceramic Submariner?

traditional bezel. i really just need 1 watch since the two are so similar. i find it a waste having 2 watches since i don't have a winder and don't want the hassle of adjusting time every 2 days.

my choices:

1. sell one
2. get winder
3. just keep one and switch every few weeks

what's the purpose of the ceramic bezel? less wear? if so, why don't they make the whole watch ceramic? break/crack too easily?

Go onto the Rolex forum you'd be surprised how many choose the seamaster planet ocean over the submariner. The ceramic bezel is primarily for looks but it does have other nice benefits.

Originally Posted by djantlive

what's the purpose of the ceramic bezel? less wear? if so, why don't they make the whole watch ceramic? break/crack too easily?

Well the Sub has always been primarily SS, and Rolex being pretty traditional in the way they change their line up making the entire watch out of ceramic just doesnt line up.

Most older Submariner users would know that the original bezel was prone to easy scratching and grazing. The new Ceramic bezel is just a bit more resistant.

The new Submariner also now has the Parachrom spring, Larger 'Maxi' Markers, Larger case, Ceramic Bezel and of course the new Glide Lock clasp.

Fantastic amount of info. Thanks for sharing that.

Excellent review and thanks for your slant on things.

One thing under "Cost" that I think should be factored is re-sell value. I'd think the Sub would hold value better and thus might make this more of a wash. Of course, that would only matter to me cause I don't hold onto pieces forever. For those that keep their pieces, then purchase price is all that really matters.

both are great watches for me the atention to detail in the finished product puts the omega a mile in front.
first the clasp both are extendable folding clasps but where the omega has a solid piece of metal that has been beutifully krafted and enginered to house the spring loaded release mechanism and give a solid feel that it does.
And the rolex oh deer it would appear that they chose to bend some tin to the shape of a clasp.