Had an Inheritance - Want a Watch

#1
Greetings Arrsers!

I've had an inheritance & would like to get a really nice watch (my daily wearer is a Traser, good but a bit battered). My requirements are:

Swiss
Automatic movement, not quartz
COSC chronometer
Date
Min. 200m water resistant
Stainless steel case
Tough glass
Tough bracelet
Robust enough for daily wear
Looks good in all modes of dress

Hmm, don't want much do I?

A second hand Rolex Submariner is about the upper limit of my budget. At the moment I've narrowed it down to a used Rolex Submariner or an Omega Seamaster Diver model 2254. Rolexes seem to be a bit "ubiquitous" at the moment.

Can anyone offer any advice on these or any other suggestions? (or a link if this has been done before).

Thanks,

F-M
 
#2
Omega lasts a little longer as their movements are more carefully manufactured. Rolexes tend to be marginally more accurate (not that you will notice).

On a more practical note, Rolexes make you look flashy and have far too much of a 'bling' effect to look good in decent company. You are far better off with an Omega. As you say, fewer people have them anyway so it retains a certain class that omega has lost.
 
#3
Hello foxs, I reckon you are best off with a good old Omega Seamaster auto chrono, there are a couple of new models out that look ace. I've had them since my BAOR days and have never failed. Or you could look at a Zeno, they're tasty.
 
#4
Loads of people will tell you not to get a Rolex for a variety of reasons but what they really mean is they can't afford one. :WINK:

I have a Rolex Submariner and it's the dog's b*llocks.
 
#5
squiffy_parsons said:
Loads of people will tell you not to get a Rolex for a variety of reasons but what they really mean is they can't afford one. :WINK:

I have a Rolex Submariner and it's the dog's b*llocks.

if the dog is a raving homo then you are right.
 
#7
I've also got the Sub Date 16610, fantastic watch and not really flashy, it's a watch that'll do the job and do it well, if you've got a chance to buy one then get it, the big difference is that if you can get a 16610 for around £2200-2300 then you'll not lose money, if you want to sell it in a couple of years you'll get your money back at least, whereas if you buy a new Omega and sell in a couple of years you'll lose at least 30% of your money.

The problem with buying secondhand though is to make sure the watch, if over 5 years old has been serviced, this means it should have a certificate from the Rolex Service Centre, this is important as a service costs £300 and can take upto 4 months to complete due to backlog at RSC.
 
#8
I've been looking at Raymond Weiss watches for myself recently - they are fantastic and a little more exclusive than Tag Heur or Rolex, they will fulfil most of your requirements I'm sure (as well as being reassuringly expensive).

BTW - a little known fact is that you can use Tesco club points to get four times the value of vouchers for Goldsmiths (the Jewellers, found in most big towns now). They do a great range of watches.
 
#9
Thanks to all who offered advice. I've now chosen the Omega Seamaster Professional, model 2254. It just looked & felt better than the opposition.
 
#10
foxs_marine said:
Thanks to all who offered advice. I've now chosen the Omega Seamaster Professional, model 2254. It just looked & felt better than the opposition.
Good choice! I've had an automatic Seamaster for two years, never lost more than a couple of seconds a month (which beats my newer Submariner's accuracy significantly :wink: ) Beautiful watch and feels like a quality piece of kit, my only criticism would be the bracelet(825), for some reason they seem to have made the clasp from a softer grade of SS than the rest of the bracelet or body, mine is scratched to buggery yet the rest of the watch is as new and untouched......bizarre!
 
#13
foxs_marine said:
Thanks to all who offered advice. I've now chosen the Omega Seamaster Professional, model 2254. It just looked & felt better than the opposition.
No no no.....Breitling; instruments for professionals. The only choice old boy.
 
#15
I have had a Rolex Submariner since Christmas of 1966. It has been into the shop twice, once when I knocked off the bezel and needed a new one and once when after 30 years I decided it was time to get it cleaned and serviced. It is stainless, not flashy, and very durable. It does not have day/date feature as IIRC they did not make them that way in 1966 I cannot imagine ever wanting another watch.

The father of one of my friends was wearing his Rolex when he was killed in a helo crash in Vietnam. His son put a new bracelet on it and wears it today.

By the way, in 1966 a brand new Submariner was $235.

I would respectfully suggest the Rolex as a good choice.
 
#16
DavidBOC said:
By the way, in 1966 a brand new Submariner was $235.

I would respectfully suggest the Rolex as a good choice.
I would begrudge paying that much today...

msr
 
#17
msr said:
DavidBOC said:
By the way, in 1966 a brand new Submariner was $235.

I would respectfully suggest the Rolex as a good choice.
I would begrudge paying that much today...

msr
After 42 years it has cost me $5.60 a year or about 1.5 cents a day.
If you would begrudge that you are really a cheap fecker.
 
#18
DavidBOC said:
msr said:
DavidBOC said:
By the way, in 1966 a brand new Submariner was $235.

I would respectfully suggest the Rolex as a good choice.
I would begrudge paying that much today...

msr
After 42 years it has cost me $5.60 a year or about 1.5 cents a day.
If you would begrudge that you are really a cheap fecker.
And how much in lost credibility for looking like a willy woofter for the last 42 years?

msr
 
#19
"acl1981"]What are you buying for the wife?


Nowt, she SNLR'd me at Christmas '05
 
#20
acl1981 said:
What are you buying for the wife?
Nowt, she SNLR'd me at Christmas '05
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top