WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am looking to pick up a Bond Seamaster soon, and am wondering which version I should go for.

The co-axial obviously is easy to find and would be brand new. The non co-axial, I see plenty of those in good condition on Ebay, so should be easy to pick up as well.

The price is not a factor for me. I like that the older one has more history as a "Bond" watch and has a more established and reliable movement. I also like the simpler caseback.

I am also a bit hesitant about the thicker case and heavier size of the new co-axial model. That being said, I would MUCH MUCH prefer buying a fresh brand new watch (just my preference), so if people could comment on the additional size/ heft of the co-axial Bond and how it compares in comfort to the older version, I'd much appreciate it.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
I'm going to make some popcorn.

Cue......Dixan, in 5,4,3,2,1....:-d

If it were me, i'd go Co-Axial, I like the raised markers and Red Seamaster lettering. Other's hate it. It matters what you want. Which one do you like better and why?

You are going to get 50 people vote for the 2220.80
and another 50 people for the 2531.50 (Ok maybe 100 people);-)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,535 Posts
I am looking to pick up a Bond Seamaster soon, and am wondering which version I should go for.

The co-axial obviously is easy to find and would be brand new. The non co-axial, I see plenty of those in good condition on Ebay, so should be easy to pick up as well.

The price is not a factor for me. I like that the older one has more history as a "Bond" watch and has a more established and reliable movement. I also like the simpler caseback.

I am also a bit hesitant about the thicker case and heavier size of the new co-axial model. That being said, I would MUCH MUCH prefer buying a fresh brand new watch (just my preference), so if people could comment on the additional size/ heft of the co-axial Bond and how it compares in comfort to the older version, I'd much appreciate it.

Thanks!
Welcome. The size difference is not really noticeable on the wrist. If you're used to wearing the older watch, you will notice the newer watch's size, but someone who has never worn either for long periods of time should not even consider the difference when deciding between the two.

BTW, see this very recent and ongoing thread:

https://www.watchuseek.com/f20/q-those-who-prefer-2531-80-over-2220-80-a-543723.html

It's just one of many that have discussed this very topic. Do a search of this forum and you will find many answers, some to questions you may not even have formed yet. ;-)

The bottom line is, both are fantastic watches. I prefer the aesthetics of the older one, and I don't mind its movement at all. However, the new watch has the 2500C movement, which, with its Co-Axial Escapement, is a marvel of innovative technology. Can't go wrong either way. Good luck. Post photos when you get yours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
4 grams more is not much but I notice it a very little bit. Of course I have been wearing the 2531.80 for a year now, that how I am able to notice. Comfort same.


Here's the difference in size and weight:
Got out my digital caliper & digital scale:

2220.80.00 - Width 12.5mm
2531.80.00 - Width 11.8mm

2220.80.00 - Bezel Width 40.9mm
2531.80.00 - Bezel Width 40.7mm

2220.80.00 - Case Diameter (8 to 2 o'clock) 41.2mm
2531.80.00 - Case Diameter (8 to 2 o'clock) 41.2mm

2220.80.00 - Case Diameter (including crown) 45.3mm
2531.80.00 - Case Diameter (including crown) 45.3mm

2220.80.00 - Weight (10 full & 2 half links) 167 grams
2531.80.00 - Weight (10 full & 2 half links) 163 grams

Good Luck :)


 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,535 Posts
I'm going to make some popcorn.

Cue......Dixan, in 5,4,3,2,1....:-d
That's not nice, nor fair. If anything, I've been more often right than wrong about our recent troll infestation. I just call them as I see them. At least I always admit when I am wrong.


4 grams is not much but I notice it a little.


Here's the difference in size and weight:

Got out my digital caliper & digital scale:

2220.80.00 - Width 12.5mm
2531.80.00 - Width 11.8mm

2220.80.00 - Bezel Width 40.9mm
2531.80.00 - Bezel Width 40.7mm

2220.80.00 - Case Diameter (8 to 2 o'clock) 41.2mm
2531.80.00 - Case Diameter (8 to 2 o'clock) 41.2mm

2220.80.00 - Case Diameter (including crown) 45.3mm
2531.80.00 - Case Diameter (including crown) 45.3mm

2220.80.00 - Weight (10 full & 2 half links) 167 grams
2531.80.00 - Weight (10 full & 2 half links) 163 grams

Good Luck :)


Measuring with calipers has its potential for slight variability. These figures shouldn't be presented as fact. To get a true picture of all measurements, you'd have to measure all components as individual, disassembled pieces. You don't, for example, offer measurements for case thickness, or case back thickness.

I maintain that the bezel assemblies are more different in height than what you suggest above. More like a one mm difference. You probably measured both bezel assemblies while they were on their respective watches, right? You'd likely get a more accurate reading if they were off the watches (as they were the one time I studied them side-by-side).

It's too hard to measure down to tenths of a millimeter by measuring components while on an assembled watch. For example, parts of the bezel assemblies cannot be seen clearly when they are installed on the case. You also have variables such as click spring tab height to consider, when measuring an assembled watch.

Also, in real life, the differences between the two are actually quite easily noticeable to a long time wearer of only one version. Maybe this difference is only prevalent at first, and becomes less so with familiarity. That, I'm sure, you can tell us all about as an owner of both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
That's not nice, nor fair. If anything, I've been more often right than wrong about our recent troll infestation. I just call them as I see them. At least I always admit when I am wrong.
I was just poking a little fun. ;-)

You've been a big help to me in my short time here :-!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,535 Posts
I was just poking a little fun. ;-)

You've been a big help to me in my short time here :-!
I've enjoyed interacting with you too. It's too bad some of these trolls have really thrown us for a loop lately. On the one hand, we all want to be helpful with new members, but it sometimes gets hard to discern who is posting in earnest, and who is just taking advantage of our collective goodwill.

(BTW, I'm not suggesting the OP here is anything but totally legit. At least I hope he is!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Thanks guys. I'm totally legit. So, my preference is slightly for the 2220.80. I like the look of the dial better actually, although I think the simpler caseback of the 2531 is preferable. I think the main factor is that I can get the watch new. It's a preference thing, I'm the type of person that doesn't even like getting watches that were in the showcase, and usually ask to get a watch that was in the back and never worn. So would much rather buy a brand new watch than a preowned one.

I actually owned a 2531 almost 12 years ago, sold it to be never ending regret. Just got back to looking into Omega watches, hence why I'm looking to buy a SMP again.

I'm a pretty sensitive watch wearer, and I've owned many watches, and I remember the 2531.80 as being one of the most comfortable watches I've ever owned, so that's why I'm a bit concerned about the extra heft of the 2220 and whether I'd notice it and if it would be uncomfortable.

Anyways, thanks again guys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
i can't imagine 4 grams being the difference between comfortable and uncomfortable. it's like a 2.5% difference. not to mention that your wrist gets used to the weight. if you don't believe me try switching wrists; your watch will feel much heavier. ditto on the size differences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
I just did a wearing test using both watches. I closed my eyes and put both on, a number of times, and moved my arm around.

Result:

I could tell the difference between weight, but it was negligible, and NOT ENOUGH to consider not buying it.

I got out my scale again.

2531.80=163 grams
2220.80=167 grams

The difference is 4 grams.

Two (2) U.S. Dimes (10 cents) equals 4 grams.

Two dimes do not weight that much.

As far as wearing comfort, the difference is even more negligible than the weight difference between the two. With my eyes closed I can tell by the feel of the case back which is which, but the 2220.80 is by no means uncomfortable, and feels just as comfortable as the 2531.80.


Good Luck, and have fun watch shopping.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,873 Posts
I'd go for the 2531.80, for the reasons I have listed on the ongoing 2220.80 v 2531.80 thread.

cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,562 Posts
your best bet would be go out into the world of shops and try it on, you will then see and feel the differnce. the only issue with a few is oiling problem once sorted should be good i should know it happened to my SMP and still loving it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Hi, I could be in a good position to answer this having just made the change from 2531.80 to 2220.80. Reasons being that personally I preferred the design and accuracy of the new version including the co-axial movement having had a Co-ax Aquaterra chrono for a couple of years, which I sold as I just didn't like the watch that much as a daily wearer.

I decided that having two mechanical watches without a winder was just a pain as whenever I wanted to swop, the watch had to be restarted and reset, so I have sold both the Aqua-T and the 2531.80, both privately for very good prices which shows there is a market for both. And a few weeks ago I purchased a new 2220.80 as my daily wearer.

IMO the 2220.80 is a superb refresh of the iconic classic SMP design which retains all the comfort, wearability and understated fashion statement whilst adding the accuracy and minor updated features obvious only to those in the know. Or at least my better half has not yet noticed the change over :).

So far so good, although this is the second 2220.80 I have had, the first refusing to restart after being left for a couple of weeks! I'm relieved that I negotiated an acceptable discount and purchased from a local AD in the end, which ensured a straightforward exchange and a further significant refund 'for my troubles'. The replaced watch has so far has been faultless as you would expect.

The addtional 4g and small external dimensional changes are unnoticeable by me when on the wrist and the accuracy is astounding, losing less than one second every 48 hours. Being new the bracelet still has that new, sharp edge and sticky feel but this is gradually starting to feel just like the old one with daily use. My 2531.80 was over 9 years old so had had a bit of wearing in I suppose.

All in all I'm very happy, and the new watch has 3 years warranty so I'm covered if anything needs attention.

I hope this is helpful.

S
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top