Rolex Submariner No Date vs Omega Seamaster 300 114060 vs 233.30.41.21.001

Contact [e-mail] for pricing and availability; Either I have it, or I can get it! Shop this Rolex: bit.ly/2R3EZac
Shop all Rolex watches: bit.ly/2SRvgkE
Shop all Omega watches: bit.ly/2GjbSLU
Rolex Submariner “No Date” 114060 vs Omega Seamaster 300 Co-Axial Chronometer (233.30.41.21.001); it’s on between two of the watch world’s premier luxury dive watches. Both stainless steel divers from Omega and Rolex are 300-meter water resistant, automatic, 40-41mm, and equipped with full bracelets.
The Rolex Submariner 114060 is the closest living relative of the first Rolex Submariner of 1953. It’s the closest current product to the Rolex 5508/5510 worn by Sean Connery as James Bond. And the Rolex 114060 is the most elemental of the current Rolex dive watches. 40mm in stainless steel, the rotating bezel “no-date” is all you need in a backup dive timer and nothing you don’t. The no-date includes a dive bezel with a Cerachrom ceramic insert.
Inside the case, a Rolex caliber 3135 automatic movement provides the precision of a COSC-certified Swiss chronometer with the toughness that’s a Rolex watch signature. The 48-hour power reserve is wound by a bi-directional rotor. Stop seconds (hacking), a Parachrom Blue antimagnetic hairspring with a Breguet overcoil.
Rolex includes an Oyster bracelet with an Oyster folding clasp for dive use. The clasp includes double locking capped by a clamshell mechanism. Inside the clasp, a Rolex Glidelock extension system moves 20mm in 2mm increments for casual adjustments or use over a dive suit. All removable links are fixed by screws.
The Omega Seamaster 300M is a heritage inspired vintage tribute watch with modern technology and materials. Its ceramic bezel with Liquidmetal inserts resolutely resists scratches, and the simple straight-lug case recalls the heyday of 1950s Omega dive watches. “Broad Arrow” hour hand, quarter Arabic numerals, and an ecru “fade” style Super Luminova luminant paint complete the vintage effect.
A stainless steel bracelet with deployant clasp offers total security and a measure of adjustment for both diving and convenience. The three-link bracelet features a folding clasp secured by a trigger-release mechanism. The extension is a push-button slider with 9.6mm of incremental adjustment. All removable links are fixed by screws.
Omega’s no-date diver includes a modern automatic caliber 8400. This Omega-exclusive movement provides 60-hours of power reserve and the precision of a COSC-certified Swiss chronometer. The Co-Axial escapement remains a marvel of precision and stability, and the Si14 silicon hairspring mitigates against the effects of powerful magnets. The caliber 8400 includes both stop seconds (hacking seconds) and a “timezone” feature that independently adjusts the hour hand for ease while traveling.
Unlike the Rolex Submariner, the Omega Seamaster 300M includes a sapphire display caseback.
Omega versus Rolex starts now!
The Rolex Submariner “No Date” features a 40mm stainless steel case surrounding a black dial on a stainless steel Oyster bracelet with folding buckle. Functions include hours, minutes and seconds. The watch also measures mm in thickness and mm from lug-to-lug.
The Omega Seamaster 300 is encased in 41mm of stainless steel surrounding a black dial on a stainless steel bracelet. Functions include hours, minutes, and seconds. The watch also measures mm in thickness and mm from lug-to-lug.
For complete details, watch the full review!
Please subscribe to our channel for the best luxury watch reviews on KZbin: www.youtube.co...
Visit our website at www.thewatchbox.com for the latest pre-owned luxury watch arrivals and industry-leading value in previously loved luxury timepieces.

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Just a quick note, since accuracy is everything; the current no-date Sub uses a caliber 3130, not a 3135. The difference is the date mech, but specs are otherwise identical and correct as stated. Best, Tim

[@rosspeterson2577]

Love your content! Same accuracy between these two no dates?

[@ed-venture7963]

I’m a proud owner of the seamaster 300, love the style of it.

[@sshah2545]

I don’t mind admitting that the Submariner brought me to watches and to dive watches in particular. But I’m quite pleased to admit I’m a Seamaster 300 owner. I adore it. I think the design is classier. Our hands are not white gold, but Rhodium. And I can’t say enough good things about the Time zone function. I spent about 25% of the entire year in 2022 on the road, at one point adjusting time zones on this watch 7x in 2 months. It wins for me with that feature on its own.

[@brentaaron1312]

Tim’s speed taking and knowledge of watches is overwhelming. That said, he’s amazing

[@richsun247]

Just picked up the Seamaster 300 myself. Love the true to retro look. Plus i got it for less than 1/2 of the Sub.

[@sailinbob11]

I just bought the Omega 300. That was my delima. Everyone, ok most people, love the Rolex. I'm a no date person,can't see it without glasses, and I'm not a cyclops guy. The Omega is less obtrusive, and different. I paint mega yachts. 8 out of 10 people i see,at work, have the Rolex. I live on my sailboat, I dive,yes the dive computers, make a watch redundant, but i enjoy working the tables while I take my surface intervals, so it's fun, and I have yet to see one in the wild,except at the AD boutique, which I think is one of the best parts. I'm getting an awesome deal ( grey market),should be here Tuesday. I may hate it but,if so,ill sell it for a profit ( doubtful ),and try something else. My dad has a 1975 Rolex Pepsi (not sure of the model, cyclops maybe? Been awhile.),and I was with him when he bought it,in Atlanta. $500... So,ill likely, have 1,at some point in my life. No disrespect, the 300 ticks all my boxes. If I have to, I'll go back to my 1984 Seiko turtle 6309-7049, which I've had for 36 years, and works just fine. It's been serviced 3 times,so it's in pretty good shape. Lotta scratches, but a trooper. That's my 2 cents. I'll let ya know how the Omega relationship goes. Peace!

[@sheffanakookoo]

How’s the omega 300 goin ?

[@sailinbob11]

@@sheffanakookoo ok, but I've got gripes. Lum ain't the greatest. While the liquid metal on the bezel is cool,I can barely see it. I'm 60,old eyes. Sits high on the wrist because of the case back, and it's just a beast weight wise. As a time piece? Excellent, tough,and hasn't given me any problems. Like a pair of shoes, try em on before ya buy em,but it's mine. No regrets buying it,but I'll stick with my 6309-7049, 40 year old Seiko Turtle for my go to dive watch,and my Tag Aquaracer for dress. May seem counterintuitive, but the Omega is my beater.

[@sheffanakookoo]

Good to hear u still got it Robert, I do agree the lume is not great especially compared to my Planet Ocean 8500 Xl on rubber strap, it’s a smaller watch than I’m used to and didn’t try it on before purchase online, so took a big risk but loved it as soon as I put it on, I got the steel and rose gold model and marvel how good it looks in different light. I alternate between the 2 on evenings and weekends and look for to wearing each one. Thanks for your reply, take care snd stay safe 👍🏻

[@sailinbob11]

@@sheffanakookoo Yes sir,thanks for the message. Best of health to you, and your family.

[@GregoryGomez]

I’ll take the Seamaster 300. And this is coming from a former Rolex fanboy having owned the Hulk, Batman, Daytona, and almost every other modern steel reference. Yes, folks, it’s possible to get off the Rolex kool-aid. Of course you have to be looking for more than just a status symbol in a watch to get to that point.

[@lamadoo]

You wouldn't stay with that Seamaster though, its 15mm thick

[@Mega-zi7ys]

@@lamadoo when worn on the wrist you actually enjoy the heft. the "thickness" isn't an issue at all. Makes the watch more substantial. Like it!

[@john1959ism]

When you know, you know.

[@rousseau327]

@@lamadoo Too many people look at the spec sheet and take that for granted. The thickness is also largely contribute to the caseback, which settles into your wrist anyways. same with Tudors nowadays

[@ericcecil6817]

Both are great, I voted with my dough and brought the Omega. It's a testament to Omega that it can hold it's own against a watch nearly double it's price on the secondary market.

[@lamaludwig1470]

For me the Omega!

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Another one for the Omega! - WatchBox Team

[@sanghoonlee5171]

Every time I flew last year, I would stop by Rolex and Omega duty-free boutiques to try them on. Each time I came to the same conclusion: Seamaster 300 is by far the more eye-catching watch, but it's 2 or 3 mm too thick. It just doesn't sit comfortably on my wrist unless I roll up the sleeve.

[@keitumetsemabuza9940]

The Omega takes it for me

[@valk67]

I sold my 14060m full set last year and i'm about to buy the new Seamaster 300. This piece looks so stunning. There are just too many fakes of the Sub. It's so pathetic. 😒

[@danny9280]

I own both watches, but I prefer omega!

[@Sisu2280]

Sure you do 👍

[@Geyik1990]

Me to!

[@imranbecks]

I picked up the Seamaster 300 a few days ago. Absolutely loving it! Looks best on the Omega Bond nato strap! Oh and the faux patina is barely noticeable at all, on mine at least.

[@kingadjust6201]

Hala Madrid 😅😎👍

[@detron666]

Great video, As a owner of a ND Sub I'm so pleased with my choice, the Omega is a fantastic watch still

[@Longshore79]

I love both. This Seamaster is a beaut in person. Just so classic looking.

[@pauljang9554]

Simply looking at aesthetics alone, I would have to go for the more subdued and refined look of the Omega.

[@Amable19401995]

I walked into my local AD this past Monday, and I saw that they had a 114060 in their case. I proceeded to spam my salesperson assuring that they didn’t sell it and picked it up that evening. Best was purchase to date.

[@jasonwells7246]

Not going diving anytime in the foreseeable future if it’s about investment of course Rolex. But come on you can’t beat the Omega better tech. Better feel on wrist. To me the Omega hands down the better one and if you can get one second hand, a steal. 👍🏻💯

[@rs685]

Got to go with Omega on this one. Though both are beautiful and you really can't go wrong with either. The visual aesthetic I have as a tie, both beautiful in different ways, but the tech and movement got to go with OMEGA. The price and NATO strap option is just icing.

[@excellentlistner5925]

Enjoyed this comparison very much. To pick one of these would be difficult, I like both. As you point out the Omega would be less expensive new or preowned and has the edge on technology, I would probably pick the Rolex for presence and recognition. Hate to admit I would want the prestige over what appears to be the better time piece. Also as you point out the Rolex is maintaining its value better. On the other hand, it is encouraging to know I could own a watch of the quality of the Omega for so much less than the Rolex. Hard choice, Thanks for a great head to head comparison

[@mynock250]

I have both watches, I prefer the clasp on the Rolex and the bezel. Looks wise I prefer the Seamaster buts its very close

[@lettuce1305]

As much as I love the Omega, the Sub takes the cake for this one. The Sub is the classic and quintessential dive watch.

[@melbguy1]

Good luck buying one at normal retail price unless you're a wealthy, pre-qualified customer with an established buying history

[@Longshore79]

The sub is just a perfect watch for me. Omega is great though , in fact my seamaster Aqua Terra keeps better time than any of my Rolex watches

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Nice! Glad to hear you're enjoying your collection! - WatchBox Team

[@imranbecks]

My Aqua Terra with the Master Co-Axial calibre which is the same as the Seamaster here keep very accurate time. Not to mention that it's anti-magnetic.

[@SJ-ym4fv]

I do love the Sub...but for me the Omega is extra special - just oozes class.

[@ericfrost7323]

So true and mechanically outperforms the Sub. I traded my much older Sub for a literally new but pre owned 300. My Rolex was in the shop so many times.

[@FirestormAA]

As much as I love Omega.... this have to give it to Rolex,,,, evio to pick one out of this two. This Omega somehow doesn't pop on me. Great review again Tim!

[@lewisjones3345]

So I decided to buy the Omega 300mc, but I still want a Sub as part of my collection. So I have decided to get a two-tone Sub to distinguish and experience the 2 best divers from the 2 biggest brands.

[@vukotabrajovic5988]

Great video of wonderful watches, that happen to be proper rivals! I would give the advantage to Omega, simply because of the availability and more fair pricing, but both watches are well worth having. Strictly horologically speaking, Omega wins in the movement department with its nicely decorated co-axial masterpiece, but Sub is considerably slimmer watch, which is always a good thing. Bracelets and cases are finished on the same level, though I prefer all-brushed Rolex Oyster...there are pros and cons for both Rolex and Omega, but, again - both watches are really great so in the end it is just a matter of personal taste. Thumbs up!

[@williamstalvey6920]

Tim, you are a genius how you describe watches. Govberg Jewelers, great store and they are fortunate to have such an expert in all facets of wristwatches. Tim, albeit unfair, pick the one watch out of all that you have tried on and tell me the best watch that you would wear if you could only pick one.

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Your kind thoughts are dearly appreciated! I'd pick the Sinn EZM 1.1 that I'm wearing (literally, my only watch purchase for about a year or so), the MIH Watch, or the Zenith Captain Winsor Annual Calendar (related to the MIH). Regarding the Zenith, I'd spring for the boutique model with the fume ("smoked") palladium dial, steel case, El Primero chronograph, and Ludwig Oechslin annual calendar system. Best, Tim

[@williamstalvey6920]

Hey thanks Tim...I am not too familiar but will look it up....I see Sinn for sale alot at Bernards....anyway, do you guys ever get a Porsche design 7176 S? Thanks, Bill

[@kevorknourian5442]

Both stunning for me Rolex

[@lordbogus6709]

The Rolex is more refined on the dial, is more recognizable and has a better bezel and bezel action. Those cut outs with platinum are way more legible if you would go diving for example. Add to that the lume and you see way more. Add to that the fact that it is a Rolex, which brings more status and it means you can exchange it anyware on the planet for cash. But in the end i do have to give it to the Omega as a whole package. The much more user friendly and safer bracelet with easy adjustabilaty and the bracelet that is just as solid. You got the much more vintage yet modern looking case with a more pleasing ration in the side profile. A dial which doesnt have an essey written on it. but the real deal is the inside, with a more innovative movement which you can actually see. It has better accuracy, better shock resistance, longer powerreserve, better antimagnetic capabilaties. i mean, for something that is used for so long and still find innovations, you gotta hand it to Omega. And last but not least, the availabilaty. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if the Rolex is better, if you cant but it. And you can get the omega at 2500 less. Omega any day of the week for me

[@johndoe-ln4oi]

I don't know if you have done this comparison, but I think it is the most heads-up comparison possible between the two brands: Rolex Date Submariner, reference 116610LN, SRP $8550. Omega Planet Ocean titanium, reference 232.90.42.21.03.001, SRP $8600. Note that the movement in this Omega model is two generations removed from the current Omega METAS movement, but I believe it is the closest to the current Rolex model in terms of anti-magnetism, while possible exceeding the Rolex in anti-shock properties. It is also a great comparison in size. While the Omega is listed at 42mm, that is the case dimension, including the asymmetrical, integrated crown guard. The actual bezel width is 40.5mm.

[@chrischiang1512]

This movement exceed >15000 Tesla Gauss , no movement in Rolex comes close so far.

[@chrischiang1512]

Omega Seamaster 300 for it's superior movement & elegant design, I can wear it in any occasions, versatile with straps option. For the price of a sub I already had 3 fine timepiece of Omega, 2 Seamasters (pro & 300 Master Co-Axial) & the legendary moonwatch. I think the hard earn money is well spent with Omega.

[@JamesK1963]

I have the Sub. Definitely my favorite of these two. However, I like the Omega enough to get one of those too. I want to get some other watches first, but eventually I'll probably add one to my collection.

[@imranbecks]

Omega wins. Very underrated. True watch aficionados would know that the Omega wins because of the movement alone.

[@265petsar]

Now this is a watch, in looks the Omega SeaMaster 300 beats the Rolex Sub hands down. The Sub looks tired and it's classic look needs some refinement, the Omega shows how it should be done. With the price of the Sub going crazy on the second hand market, because you can't buy a new one this is a no brainer. I feel a lot of people who pay big money for the Rolex Sub are going to wish they had spent it on a couple of SeaMasters. My daughter works in the industry and is saddened by people who think they are on a list, a list that they may never get to the end of, because those desired cutomers always come straight in near the top. This is a universal thing, and she knows customers who think their Rolex will be on their wrists in a couple of years, will be constantly pushed back by very wealthy buyers. Life's to short this Omega could fill the gap the Sub has left in this sector of the market.

[@karlomcastro]

At the risk of sounding like a fanboy, this isn't a close one. The Sub "no-date" retains its crown. I like Omega and I actually own a Seamaster PO, but this particular Seamaster pales in comparison to the king. Movement-wise, I'll give it to Omega but the Sub's 3130 is no slouch too. The overall look and the timeless design of the Sub just wins it. I'm also not a fan of the Seamaster's faux patina. Of course that's just my personal opinion and when it comes to watches, there is no right or wrong choice. You buy what your heart desires. Cheers!

[@DavidDatura]

Rolex is the easy winner here IMO.

[@patrick7474]

I have both, but I wear the omega 300 a lot more than my sub. Everyone has a sub these days, chances are you will bump into someone also wearing the Rolex Sub. Rolex retains good value, but that only matters if u can actually sell it.

[@Mega-zi7ys]

Yes. Subs are everywhere.

[@imranbecks]

@@Mega-zi7ys They are everywhere but yet nowhere to be seen at Rolex boutiques..... Lol

[@Mega-zi7ys]

@@imranbecks 🤣 .. funny huh? Just like slim Jims , when asked nobody eats them because they're unhealthy etc etc but somehow the factory that makes them sells a whole lot of them!🤣

[@geertvoorwinden8924]

Most people who have an Omega, prefer a Rolex submariner. That is the way so many Omega’s are for sale by particulars. Their grailwatch is in the end a Submariner. Most iconic, better value and more precisely by experience.

[@bigmike3541]

I love the no date sub and strongly prefer it to the default, but I hope there’s an update at some point to give it a colored dial (blue, green, something new?)

[@cliveb15]

I nearly always pick the Omegas but this time I gotta go with the Sub, I think it’s the thickness of the Seamaster the makes me opt for the Rolex 👍⌚️

[@richardharris3121]

Have you ever tried one ?as a owner of both brand i prefer omega .because omega sit well and comfortable

[@cliveb15]

@@richardharris3121 I have the SMP 300m which I love but not owned this particular model ⌚️👍

[@MrJruta]

@@richardharris3121 Yeah I don’t get why people say that, I own the Omega and it sits AMAZINGLY well, not tall at all I’m my opinion.

[@whereRbearsTeeth]

I’d have to go with the sub. I love the omega, but I think the polished center links ruin the watch

[@rousseau327]

That's an easy fix, any shop with a grinder can brush that surface for you!

[@UnderseaAdventures]

@@rousseau327 Yikes!

[@rousseau327]

@@UnderseaAdventures I think the negative connotation of polishing scratches off of watches, has taken away from the actual mechanics of the process lol. If you want to brush out a polished surface, that will hardly take any material off. All it's doing to introducing tons of microscratches to give it a brushed look. Very different than polishing out scratches

[@UnderseaAdventures]

@@rousseau327 Actually, I cannot understand why anybody would deface the surface on a watch. But grinding off the polished surface does take off metal. It is understandable if you do not like polished surfaces on a dive watch. Different brand of vodka, as the saying is.

[@rousseau327]

​@@UnderseaAdventures Because they can, and if the only thing you don't like about a watch is a polished surface, and there's no other watch out there in the category and/or price that you like compared to that watch, then I can totally see why someone would. The fact that you're saying brushing it "grind off the polished surface" tells me you don't actually know much about the brushing process. Does it remove material? Of course. But introducing thousands of tiny scratches to create a brushed surface is not the same as grinding down a scratch and then repolishing. Plus, it's a fucking bracelet. It's the one part of a steel watch that can be replaced, no harm no foul. You take off much more material by polishing off desk diving scratches than you would by converting a polish surface to brushed.

[@connorgmehlin2986]

Omega hands down! Better tech at better price. And since almost nobody uses dive watches for diving the thinner bezel and no crown guards leads to more versatile watch overall! People usually buy a sub just because it’s marketed better.

[@TruckeeDoggo]

Omega for me, but obviously not purchased at retail. It may be a revival, but it has a lot of class. And unlike the Submariner, not ever punk out there has one.

[@UnderseaAdventures]

I own both and wear both. If the push button adjustment in the Omega clasp was combined with the 20mm of adjustment in the Rolex perfection would be achieved

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Thanks Speedster InaKoenigsegg! If you have a quick second, click through to our site and write a review of your watches. Our customers love to read about real world experience when shopping on our website. Here are the links: www.thewatchbox.com/shop/Rolex-Submariner-114060.html www.thewatchbox.com/shop/Omega-Seamaster-233-30-41-21-001.html Thanks in advance!

[@angelomelis9464]

Love Omega vintage style..

[@FrederickHwang]

Omega is taking over. The 300 for me!

[@americandobermann]

I go for the Omega any day of the week. More stylish, more elegant, and it has a way better movement

[@danielplainview4778]

I think it’s really not even close the Sub clearly wins in all categories even price isn’t different enough to be a logical reason to buy the omega

[@publiusvelocitor4668]

I'd say they are pretty evenly matched. My personal preference leans towards the Omega, because I'm not a fan of the "Mercedes" hour hand on the Rolex, and the 12,3,6,9 has a nice classic look on the Omega dial. Longer power reserve and display caseback puts Omega over for me.

[@chrischiang1512]

@P G buy a Toyota, it holds better value than a BMW

[@johndoe-ln4oi]

I have both, except the Sub is the date version, and they are great watches. I prefer the Omega because I think it dresses up better and it is a more esoteric choice versus the Rolex. I don't think the Sub has superior bezel action, at least not in my experience, but I do fault the Seamaster for sitting too high off the wrist.The thinner Rolex makes it wear better to me. I would really like to see Omega reduce the thickness on the bottom side of the case, even if this means getting rid of the display back.

[@zinzrah]

Great video. I will be picking up a Seamaster 300 very shortly and in my opinion it's the better watch. Now I do already have a Submariner but I do like this more. Now will I feel that way after I have it on my wrist for year? Time will tell lol

[@wukillah]

I own both. Love the SM 300, this is actually my most cherished watch in my collection, I adore it. That being said the Sub is hands down a superior watch: mouvement (precision, reliability), bracelet, finishing, robustness.

[@neillferguson7279]

It's fine saying give it to the Rolex however the Rolex costs over 30% more than the Omega more if you get a discount from the AD you won't get that buying the Rolex. The advantage of the Rolex is future value over the Omega. They are both great watches. I prefer the vintage look of the Omega with its slightly less polished dial and look, the down side to the Omega and were it fails is the polished bracelet centre links it just takes away from the rough and tumble feel. What more can you say about the Rolex its well Rolex.

[@alphaTrader.oo1]

If not thinking of resell value, that Seamaster could be a better choice because Sub is too common, that's why I no longer wearing them,unless it's a 1680 or 5512

[@camagalis]

Definitely, the no date ceramic Sub, for me. I've had a Pelagos, SMP 300 and other divers, and it is the only one left in that genre! Nice video, Tim!

[@watchsimi92]

I Tool the Two Tone Sub with Blue Dial. 116613lb. This Watches Hubes you More luxuriös Feeling. More Prestige and wär More elegant. As a Diver and with Nato Straps and with the Better movement you Van See on the back the Omega is absolutley Great. For this Price. Wow, Great Job.

[@trinchiii51]

I think you picked the wrong Sea Master to compare to the Rolex but even then I picked the Omega. better movement,more accurate,better price and can buy it when ever we want. Some say Rolex is better resale but I say you already lost 2 to 3 thousand dollars if you buy the Rolex cause Omega being a better watch is 2 to 3 thousand dollars less.

[@ivomarkoff]

Omega SM 300 here, only on leather strap. Love it.

[@cesarlomibao2662]

Excellent comparison Tim!!!! I own the Rolex 116610 and the new Omega 300m Pro. I love them both. I have to agree with your choice of the Rolex. Again, an excellent comparison!! I very much enjoyed this video. Happy Holidays!!

[@mbingham10]

Omega all day long, understated class

[@LuisOrtizMBA]

Tim, can we see a Submariner Date vs. 2018 Omega Seamaster 300M (black versions) comparison?

[@LuisOrtizMBA]

A couple of additional suggestions: blue Sub vs. blue Seamaster 300m and Submariner Hulk vs. blue/gray Seamaster 300m (the more fun and casual versions of these great watches).

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Hi Luis, I think that's probably the logical next move. I'll see if I can shoot this while I'm back in the office before the new year. Best, Tim

[@49fiori]

​@@the1916companywatchreviews please do! Even though I Love the Sub this is where I think Omega has murdered Rolex's Sub Date. I have the new 300M that wave blue ceramic dial, that beautiful ceramic bezel, sapphire back showing off beautiful 8800 caliber and by far the most amazing feature of all a very elegantly implemented glide lock mechanism with a push button. This is only if we compare Sub Date vs 300M, if we compare Sub it is just another league on its own. Also, I think Rolex should go with better glide lock mechanism in the new Sub (hopefully 2023), ceramic dial, and hopefully new caliber 3230, cannot wait for the new 124060.

[@LuisOrtizMBA]

Only thing I would have liked to see in the Seamaster 300M is for Omega to use the 8900 movement with the jump hour travel setting. But I get it, most people will prefer the quick date setting and it would probably have cannibalized sales of the Aqua Terra.

[@romeos50]

The 3130 movement is so accurate.

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Solid movement for sure! - WatchBox Team

[@512bb]

Its a tie Tim, both beautiful & cool for different reason's. If you love divers then why not own both of them if you can swing it.

[@john1959ism]

Yea, if you can find one.

[@michaelbishop9157]

I own both but hardly wear the Omega as it's so thick on the wrist - poor aesthetics and wearability undermine a decent watch. The submariner is an easy wearer in all circumstances

[@rs685]

I completely disagree. The omega is king here. Unique and refined. All rolexes look the exact same and the new super cases are way over the top. I would argue the older rolex models of this watch were better

[@dstfno]

​@@rs685 This is not a matter of opinion, the Omega is just way thicker. They managed to hide it well by adapting the design but occasionally the 15mm become very noticeable and obtrusive. I sold it for that very reason.

[@JeremiahHartmanPhotography]

Thank you so much for this review! For some reason it wouldnt come up in a search i found it scrolling through your other videos. I really needed this review because although the Sub has been my grail watch since i was a kid (thank you 007) the prices have exceeded what I am willing to pay for a stainless diver. I found the 300m and fell in love with the reissue style but was conflicted on letting the sub go. This was a huge help!! Thank you Tim!

[@prao4166]

These are great but where are the graphically produced “versus” videos? Thanks!

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

This stripped down format feels more sincere to me. Frankly, the other format seemed too much like Watchfinder, and it wasn't generating enough views for the work involved. The new style receives similar views, and I'm able to shoot more of them. Best, Tim

[@paulbelopolsky7460]

I owned the Omega for a while but wound up flipping it. The style is beautiful and so is the movement but here are the major negatives compared to the Sub - too thick, polished center links, the faux patina. These days I own a Kermit, as I prefer the style of the 5 digit cases. I don’t quite understand why you would compare the latest no date Sub to the 16610. Why not compare it to the 14060, its direct predecessor?

[@rs685]

You criticize the Omega for polished center links and subtle faux patina but buy a green sub? It seems the attention seeking elements you dislike in the Omega is trumped by the attention hoarding green of the Kermit. Just saying. To each his own.

[@AhmadThabet-qw1kc]

Definitely I will go for the Omega Seamaster, as it is cheaper without any compromise of the Technical Specifications. Also, the longer power reserve of 60 hours is an advantage, among the Rolex Submariner. Furthermore, the Seamaster looks more dressy as a Daily watch and has more attractive looks.

[@49fiori]

Any day of the week I'd choose Omega, but 114060 is by far one of the most important and most beautiful watches one can buy on the market today.

[@johndoe-ln4oi]

I would like to respectfully point out that the 1953 date given for the Sub isn't correct. It is often repeated and I think Rolex's amazing marketing shows its value here; creating a bit of an urban legend. A prototype for the Sub was first shown in 1953, possibly hurried into the limelight as a result of the introduction of the Blancpain 50 Fathoms and the Zodiac Seawolf in 1953, but the Submariner did not actually go into production until 1954, trailing Blancpain and Zodiac by a year. I see this 1953 date repeated so often and it seems to make people believe that Rolex was the first to produce the modern dive watch as we know it, but it isn't so. I believe they were one of the early pioneers, along with the other two brands mentioned, as well as Omega 3 years later. Rolex has done more to turn the tool watch into a luxury watch than any other brand, but they weren't the first.

[@jamespope6795]

Good point. It is the first true diver though even with a 1954 release date. The Blancpain and the Zodiac suck. Not sure why anyone would purchase those watches.

[@seakwaileong4627]

You got the name wrong, the Rolex is Submariner, the date version is called Submariner Date.

[@gavinstill9504]

I decided to go with the Omega. I love Rolex (owned a GMT Master II), but I don't like people knowing what my watch is (especially clients, who might think I make too much money based on the watch I wear lol). Different for my stepson, who is buying a Rolex at 19 yo (with his own $) and to be taken seriously should have something recognizable. For me, the exhibition caseback and a design that allows leather/NATO bracelets made the decision for me. Both beautiful, however...

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Thanks Gavin Still! If you have a quick second, click through to our site and write a review of the watch. Our customers love to read about real world experience when shopping on our website. Here's the link: www.thewatchbox.com/shop/Omega-Seamaster-233-30-41-21-001.html Thanks in advance!

[@Bill-Badger]

Sub Mariner = Sun Sea Master = Moon I just like Sea Master because of that’s elegant and flexible beauty.

[@harajiko123]

practically speaking, you get more on what you pay on seamaster for nearly half the price of sub... sub is rolex so you pay the rolex price but less of what you are getting compare to seamaster... seamaster wins.

[@davidofglenbrook4487]

I’ve owned four different Omega Seamasters as well as a Speedmaster. I’ve owned two Rolexes including one Sub. So I know these two watch lines intimately. My choice here would be the Submariner. I should also mention that next year, when Rolex updates the Sub with its new, patented Caliber 3200 series movement, Rolex will once again leapfrog ahead....

[@johndoe-ln4oi]

I have both as well. Honestly, Rolex needs to just catch up to the master co-axial movement. If it can leap frog it, as you say, it will be quite an achievement.

[@SaadyAb]

If i wanted to get a sub, should I wait until next year?

[@davidofglenbrook4487]

Abdullah Saady it really depends on you. If you want to wait to see if the Sub will be updated this year, you can, but the cost of getting that new model will almost certainly rise. It’s really up to you and what you want. Either way, 904L steel Rolex sport watches are hard to get through authorized dealers these days.

[@SaadyAb]

@@davidofglenbrook4487 I called a local AD earlier today and they told me that they received one yesterday that wasn't spoken for, so I went and picked it up. The current movement has been around for 30 years, and this is probably the last iteration of it, so it's the best it could possibly be. Essentially, a watch with a perfect movement. Also, I really don't want to pay more for one with a newer movement lol

[@davidofglenbrook4487]

Abdullah Saady Wow! You’re a very lucky man! Congratulations! As a Sub owner myself, I can tell you that you have acquired a lifetime friend!

[@lewisjones3345]

I think the Rolex Sub is the perfect mens watch. Although, when it came time for me to buy a diver, these were 2 of my 3 options (I also considered the Tudor BB Black) and I chose the Omega 300mc. I just couldn't get past the cost difference. I bought the Omega 300 AND a Tudor Black Bay GMT for nearly the cost of the Rolex Sub.

[@Mlopez_602]

I have both of these. My first and second luxury watches. I got them back when Watchuwant was on their own.

[@nickrice7535]

Good review. I have the 114060 but would like to add the Omega, used of course.

[@pedrosaenz2800]

The maxi case with those thick lugs needs to be redesigned. James Cameron, Datejust, GMTII Pepsi already have better cases and better matching bracellets.

[@maeda1224]

Omega. I think it’s chicer and elegant that I can wear with tuxedo or a t-shirt. It’s very accurate and 60 hours reserve is a big plus. I travel often and the time zone adjustment is so useful.

[@agilagilsen8714]

Ok, so the submariner is in my opinion the diver. It is the most versatile in terms of look, it is the most recognizable and even with the brand having a bit of a snob reputation in some circles it is hard to argue against it. That said, I love Omega. It is by far my favorite brand, and the seamaster is by far my favorite line that they make. Not to mention that the Master 300 is everything I have wanted in an Omega ever since i started looking at getting a new one that isn't a more vintage model. And that's why i have to give it to the omega, it isn't the prettier watch, it doesn't hold it's value as well and it it lacks that iconic, timeless look of the submariner. And still, I can't help but love it more. It is the seamaster i have always wanted, simple, elegant and versatile. It doesn't have the nitrox valve that makes the regular 300 feel off when you wear it with a suit, it isn't as big as the planet ocean that makes it to big to go under a dress shirt and it isn't so flashy that you can't have it as an everyday wear watch for a hoodie when you want. in short it is (for me) the perfect watch. Added to that the superior heritage of Omega as opposed to Rolex and you have an absolute winner in my book.

[@ElusiveMasquerade]

I really like the Omega. It just seems to be the better watch.

[@darylwardsnyder4406]

Gotta go with the Omega. It’s coaxial movement is innovation x 10 and with 15,000 gauss nothing is going to disrupt the tick tick tick. (And why Rolex continues to market the Milgauss as antimagnetic is sheer hubris. They need to pay attention to Omega’s 15,000 success story.) While I respect Rolex greatly, I don’t appreciate having to get on a waiting list just to spend my money! And then see new timepieces on the secondary markets with 40 to 60% premium markups. It’s disgusting. I do like the Oyster bracelet and clasp better, though. Not a fan of push buttons. Seems low rent. And I like the white gold indices on the Rolex. Will disagree with you on the bezel. The Seamaster’s really unique. The Rolex bezel is on every copycat out there. Seamaster 300 wins my vote. Actually tried it on at an Omega store today. Planning to buy it.

[@rs685]

I just bought the omega and I am blown away. Unbelievable. Omega has gone next level

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

Thanks Rick S! If you have a quick second, click through to our site and write a review of the watch. Our customers love to read about real world experience when shopping on our website. Here's the link: www.thewatchbox.com/shop/Omega-Seamaster-233-30-41-21-001.html Thanks in advance!

[@rs685]

@@the1916companywatchreviews Done. Thanks Tim. Great reviews as always. Love watching them. Your knowledge is A+. Keep up the good work

[@bohun28]

I'd choose both.

[@rousseau327]

The Omega is like a Sub, Milgauss, and travelers watch rolled into one, and hardly loses in quality. It takes the cake imo.

[@ArnaudSiemons]

I own the Seamaster Titanium Blue version. Owned the Submariner but sold it which I still regret to this day.

[@thebikerkid6]

Rolex is boring, omega is a great watch

[@drhombus242]

I think the omega looks better, but I’d have the sub, simply because it’s a sub. Looks like Rolex’s marketing is working

[@connorgmehlin2986]

David Abraham sadly yes, it seems people will pay more for less tech simply to have the name. Omega for me all day!

[@SaadyAb]

@@connorgmehlin2986 Id get the Rolex simply because it's the original 007 watch.

[@lv407]

Buy both!

[@giangvu7902]

This is a tough one to take side on but I think the look and the technology of the Omega won me over. Yes I know Rolex is a more recognizable brand and retains value better, but I do buy my watches based on what it can do for me, not how much I can get back when I sell it. But in all honesty, they are both great watches.

[@HywelOwen]

Oh wow, Tim made a (very) rare mistake. The 114060 has a 3130 movement at the moment.

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

It happens. The 3135 without a date, as you note. Thanks for the correction! Best, Tim

[@HywelOwen]

@@the1916companywatchreviewsIt was like finding out God isn't omnipotent. I found it very unsettling...!

[@barnpicks8884]

I own both and in my opinion Omega is the better watch as you can see the tech that goes with it. Rolex is a better brand holds value. Both are cracking good watches! If you like the idea of sea get both watches! Another tool watch i own is the Explorer 1 & 2 a must have!

[@MarkMphonoman]

People are commenting that the Sub is too common so they won’t buy it. I say popular and compare it to a luxury brand like BMW. Just because you see many BMW’s on the road, that is no reason not to buy the vehicle. It is popular. Period.

[@thor7274]

Omega for me.

[@Visitor555]

3500$ for second hand in good condition for Omega vs 9000$ second hand in good condition submariner... there is no comparison Omega wins here for the almost tripple lower price point.

[@ericfrost7323]

Mechanically superior, less cost; the 300 is a no brainer. My Sub was in the shop far too often DESPITE doing the 5 year, costly maintenance. Even James Bond switched despite that Ian Fleming wrote Rolex into his Bond books, haha!

[@braziers]

Omega for me, so much so that I just purchased mine!

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

NICE! Which model did you buy? - WatchBox Team

[@braziers]

WatchBox Reviews This exact model, Omega Seamaster 300 on the bracelet. Also bought an Omega NATO strap in solid black to wear daily.

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

@@braziers Oh, very nice. It'll look great on the Nato as well! Enjoy! :) - WatchBox Team

[@braziers]

Thanks! For what it’s worth, I don’t mind the Submariner. I’m just not a fan of the Maxi-case, and that made the decision even easier for me. I wish they’d have kept the previous case but used the Maxi-dial, like they did with the Anniversary ‘Kermit’.

[@the1916companywatchreviews]

@@braziers Totally understand, the Maxi case can be a little too Maxi. We also like the combo in the Kermit. :) - WatchBox Team

[@philipvanderkooy4248]

Tim, can you please do a review of the Omega Planet Ocean 8500 in 42mm black dial?🙏🏻