Hi Bill & gang,
I'm not really an Omega freak so please correct me if I'm wrong.
Like some other fans, I agreed that Omega appeals to the mass. They seem to cover all areas in the market share with different designs, the Seamasters being their bread and butter product line.
While I do have Rolexes, from DS, SD to Kermit, it is an Omega Seamaster chronometer 600m (co-axial) that spend the most of my wrist time.
Why is it so? Simply becos it's humble. Omega to me is value for money yet it does have a rich history.
I recalled an incident when I brought a vintage seamaster for verification at SWATCH service centre and they commented it's a great timepiece compared to current lines cos the old Omegas have great movements! That is the reason why I see so many of you shared your vintage collection on this forum.
Now, I'm starting to think about current Omega's reliabilty ( not that I had problem with ). It seems to me that Omega's move with the co-axial escapement is purely a marketing strategy rather than a break-thru. Something that Omega wants to show us they have this technology while others dont.
Perhaps it's better off for Omega to stick to their beautiful cal 1120 just like Rolex did with its cal 3135?
Just my thoughts...