Omega

 I originally intended to do a review of my some of my wife's beautiful Omega's but I decided to do a follow up of the AT GMT, with new pictures, as I think it would be more interesting to forum members. I've also received emails regarding my AT GMT (and my Hour Vision Annual Calendar too) and my impression is that lots of people want real world opinions about the watch from real owners without any BS. The watch is expensive and I can understand that people want to be sure. I can say that my watch has been performing beautifully, accurately and consistently. The complex movement is a joy to handle and adjust. The watch operates as it's supposed to, with the full 55hr power reserve and it starts up on my wrist when it's depleted.  There are no idiosyncracies to report. Like I said, the watch is superbly consistent in operation and acurate in time keeping. It's certainly performing better than the cal 2500 liquid metal seamaster that recently broke down and was reported over at watchuseek.  One thing I've noticed is that all cal 3603 owners just love their GMT watch and I'm no certainly different, despite owning other desirable watches. I think the main reason for this is that the design of the AT GMT is very complete and fully realised. It's undoubtedly a stunning and luxurious sports chronograph that sits very impressively on the wrist. Lol, it's a BBW, a big beautiful watch, that is! The point I'd like to emphasize is that because of the thorough completeness of the design, the impressive finishing and gorgeous movement, I can genuinely say there is no one thing that stands out about the watch. In fact EVERY aspect of the watch stands out and this is what omega magic is all about. The dial, bezel, case, column wheel movement, sapphire back, GMT function, butterfly clasp, screw in bracelet and overall finishing is nothing less than outstanding. I get a greater buzz and vibe wearing this watch than either my Daytona or Hour Vision Annual Calendar, both of which are genuinely great watches too. I wear the Daytona to keep up with my wife's incredible omega, the Hour Vision is for evening time and the AT GMT is what I wear for my own personal style and pleasure.

The outstanding characteristic of the dial is its playfulness, which neither a Daytona or Hour Vision has. As I previously said, the dial speaks of summer and the outdoors. Other than some ####### #####, there is nothing better to look at. Although there is a ton of detail on the dial I really admire the way Omega clearly layed out the dial. It really contributes much to the success of the watch.  The hands are especially handsome, and with the chrono function engaged, having a  total of seven hands turning is just wonderful!!! I think the bezel is the nicest of any diving watch in terms of appearance and design. Many diving watch bezels are too huge and overwhelm the watch.

This is what Omega Magic is all about! The clarity of the dial is superb given the all detail on the dial. I tell ya, I was very lucky to get these two great shots of the watch!

The case shows the real genius of Omega design because the lugs conceal the 44mm diameter of the watch. The watch is not bulky althought it is large. Perfect!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This message has been edited by Pistol Pete on 2010-08-22 09:45:46

Pistol Pete , I removed two words from your post,  email me if you want to talk about ... Bill sohne
This message has been edited by Bill Sohne on 2010-08-22 18:58:39

Does it mention in your manual whether the pushers are water resistant to the level where it is operable when submerged? I'm not asking to really use the chronograph underwater. Just say, for example, when you wear it in a pool without any intention to use the chronograph function, do you have to be careful not to allow the buttons to be pressed?

This is a sincere question because all of my Omega chronographs are Speedmasters and not Seamasters. Please disregard our past disputes for the good of the forum. Thank you.

Ruckdee

Lol, while I was admiring my own pictures I noticed something about the first picture that I hope many of you did as well. Do you notice the superb quality of the double sided anti reflection coating of the sapphire crystal?????? Notice how the sapphire crystal has just disappeared????? You feel like you are looking right into the dial. I congratulate Omega for going the extra mile and implementing double sided anti reflection on the sapphire crystal. In truth, a brilliant dial like the AT GMT deserves nothing less!! Naturally it added to the expense of the watch, but nothing is more truer than the old adage that #### #### #### #####.

I now feel like I did an injustice to my AT GMT in not highlighting the superb quality of the double sided AR coating. My final jugdement on the watch is that the watch lacks absolutely nothing in terms of features. The Aqua Terra GMT is remarkable for its completeness and fullness of design. Omega Magic at its best!!!!!!!

This message has been edited by Pistol Pete on 2010-08-24 07:40:38

Hi Pete,

Thanks for the wonderful photos.

I agree with you that there is much to like about this Seamaster GMT. In fact your original post sparked enough interest for me to take a good look at one at the Omega Boutique.

The only issue I had with the design related to the continuous seconds sub-dial at 9 o'clock. While it's main function, particularly on a watch equipped with a chronograph, might be to indicate that your watch is wound and ticking, I would have preferred it to have the seconds marked, rather than 5 second intervals. It would have matched with the adjacent sub-dial at 3 o'clock as well.

It was probably a conscious design decision on the part of Omega, and it's an interesting one, but I find that I use the seconds hand to time short intervals, even on my chronos.

Otherwise the depth in the dial, which you capture well, is great, as is the depth in the movement. I wish Omega had done a little more with the automatic rotor, but that's a minor point. A great watch from Omega.

Andrew

The seconds subdial of the AT GMT shares the same layout as the Rolex Daytona and the Speedy pro, which I believe are the standard for classic chronograph design. In classical terms, you're asking for a level of precision that is normally expected to be found in the chronograph function rather than in the seconds subdial. Given this, I think there is no pressing need for a 60 second subdivision of the subdial. It's not a feature that has ever been thought of as neccessary (just use the chrono function) or even desirable (too messy and busy). Neither will you find such subdials in very contemporary designs like the JLC Amvox DBS and IWC Da Vinci chrono. Also, don't you think that it would look somewhat untidy to have so many markers on a little subdial? I would also beg to differ that marking 60 seconds would match the 30 minute totaliser because the second subdial would have twice as many markers as the minute totaliser.

Here are some pictures to refresh your memory. The chocolate Deville (my wife's) and Daytona (mine) are some of the most brilliant chronographs on the market and they both have identical seconds subdials as indeed our beloved Speedmaster has. This is as classical as it gets. I like Omega's tri compax layout better because it more symetrical than Rolex.

Have I managed to change your view on the matter?????? What do you other guys think?????

 

 

 

Hi Pete,

We could probably find plenty of examples of both styles, but just to demonstrate what I was referring to across several brands in both vintage and modern pieces, dress and sport chronographs, here are some images from the archives. Both designs have their place and I enjoy both. Actually the Daniel Roth Ref. 247 chronograph shows a nice alternative to both that works well to my eye.

And another great photo from your collection. Keep them coming!

Regards

Andrew

 Breguet Ref. 5947 Rattrapante

Blancpain Flyback Chrono A Toute Vitesse

F.P.Journe Octa Chronograph

Glashütte Original PanoMatic Chrono XL

Audemars Piguet PG triple chronograph ca.1940

Daniel Roth Ref. 247 chronograph

Roger Dubuis Easydiver Chronograph

Vacheron Constantin Chronograph Ref. 4072

Audemars Piguet Rubbens Barichello

The examples you gave clearly show that full 60 second markers on a subdial can look very elegant indeed. You have thoroughly convinced me of that. I now think I overstated the case. I like the Blancpain and Breguet best. I also share your sentiment regarding the Roth design. Some of the other, rather odd, designs suffer from peculiarity, and accordingly, they'll certainly never be regarded as classics. They are merely fashionable and seasonal. They'll pass away when the next market researched model is churned out. To this extent, the Daytona is the classic chronograph par excellence (which I agree with). It is seen as the premier sport chronograph on the market and is the most desired and admired watch on the planet (which I disagree with). I also sincerely think that my particular Daytona model has the nicest looking subdials of the lot! While there are better watches than the Daytona (but at what price?!!!), including my wife's horribly expensive chocolate Deville, nevertheless, none of them have that classic status the Daytona enjoys. I therefore am inclined to think the best and most enduring design belongs to the Daytona, which includes the layout of the tri compax design and the layout of the seconds subdial in particular. On this I remain convinced. As I previously said, the design is as classical as it gets.

 

It's unfortunate, nay, very sad, that the Speedmaster doesn't enjoy a status has high as the Daytona. In fact, because of its historical significance, it deserves a higher status. However, Omega have only themselves to blame. They downgraded the movement from the 321 to the 861 and cheapened the name with low end Valjoux Speedmasters.