The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Feel free to discuss pricing and specific dealers. But 'for sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Full archive of all messages is accessible through options in the Search and Preferences features. Privacy, policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.
For the answer to the NUMBER #1 most frequently asked question here--for details or value of a specific older Omega watch you have--go to: Tell Me About My Omega. | Learn more about How To Include Photos and HTML In Your Postings. | To contact someone with a question not relevant to other readers of the forum, please click on their email address and contact them privately. |
I've been researching these two watches as much as I can and just can't decide between them. I like them equally in terms of looks. The functions of the Speedmaster are nice to have but not necessary for me.
I like the water resistance of the Seamaster, but again, it's not necessary for me.
All things being equal, I would be leaning toward the Seamaster, if it weren't for the difference in the movements. I think I like the 1861 movement of the Speedmaster more, since I have heard that it is more shock resistant than the 1120, and might last longer as well. Is this true? I think my decision is going to come down to the pros and cons of these two movements. An automatic is nice but I don't mind needing to wind every day either.
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |