WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
41 - 60 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
Having owned 2 I would say - the 45mm on bracelet was THE most uncomfortable watch I have ever owned. The 42mm was much more comfortable. Both were beautiful but I had to let the big one go
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,477 Posts
Hi Pirateninja

Have you considered the 2500 PO? - it's not as much of a 'chunky and hefty boy" but rather more a classic diver size, & IMHO the 42mm version doesn't loose any of its appeal in the smaller (than the full 44.5) size.

I have a couple of 1st generation 2500 in 42mm. I got my first one yonks ago, around when Daniel Craig as 007 wore 2500 POs back in "Casino Royale" etc days....
( ... though it was Jeremy Clarkson wearing his to Burma, the North Pole etc on BBC Top Gear that convinced me. He still wears it, on The Grand Tour, Clarkson's Farm etc.)

The 2500 PO is not as thick as the iterations which followed, and wears slimmer to the wrist than those that I've tried.

I have both of mine on the later 8500 bracelet for various improvements, ease of adjustments (screws instead of pins & sleeves), & both have 117STZ001154 micro-adjustable steel clasps fitted. Common mods awhile ago.

Although I wear mine on a strap (or single-pass NATO) ½ the time, I also wear it on the bracelet a lot, & have never once "found it to be freakishly thick."

Apologies for the horrendous glut of pics, but hopefully gets the point across better than any more words :

Watch Hand Analog watch Clock Wrist


Watch Analog watch Clock Material property Watch accessory


Watch Analog watch Photograph White Light


Watch Water Plant Analog watch Finger


Watch Analog watch Water Clock Watch accessory


Watch Arm Analog watch Sleeve Gesture


Watch Sky Hand Analog watch Arm


Watch Hand Analog watch Arm Gesture


Watch Hand Analog watch Arm Product


Watch Analog watch Light Black Silver


Watch Analog watch Green Light Blue


Watch Hand Analog watch Clock Finger


Watch Analog watch Plant Green Blue


Find whats best for you, Pirateninja - just trying to illustrate the 2500 PO is not "freakishly thick", but a very comfortable and wearable classic dive watch. Good luck whatever you decide (y)

EDIT : - Pics on my 7" wrist
( ...but can swell to 7.25" in the summer heat & humidity here).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
My very first Omega was the blue dial PO Ti Co Ax 45.5 on the Ti Bracelet purchased in 2010. Not only it was my daily beater but that watch could sure take 0ne Heck of a beating! Would you believe me if I told I even wore the PO during every annual Penang Bridge International Marathon for the next 5 yrs! OK, I had my G Shock on the other wrist!
Sold the PO Ti in 2016, that was one of the worst decisions of my life, I even had sleepless nights and nightmares!!!
Of course, I've other watches in my collection but I really wanted that PO back...badly
By that time, I believe the MC version was released so I told myself "To Heck With Everybody Else" and bought back the Blue Dial SS 43.5 mm on the bracelet. What a Huge Relief . Been a happy kid ever since.The watch is now not on my daily routine rotation but once a while I do wear it. Just love that reassurance and great solid wrist presence!!


Sent from my EVR-L29 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
The Planet ocean is due for a refresh, I think next year or in 2023, I believe that next version will be slightly slimmer, as far as I know sales of PO line is not as good compared to other offerings by Omega especially the SMP. Nevertheless, the planet ocean line is Omega's top notch, the built quality is second to none and the movement is very accurate.

I have a 7 inch rest and I own the chrono version which is even thicker and bigger but I love it, however, it won't be my daily driver, as I believe due to proportions only the SMP is the better watch, just my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pirateninja

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,473 Posts
Hi Pirateninja

Have you considered the 2500 PO? - it's not as much of a 'chunky and hefty boy" but rather more a classic diver size, & IMHO the 42mm version doesn't loose any of its appeal in the smaller (than the full 44.5) size.

I have a couple of 1st generation 2500 in 42mm. I got my first one yonks ago, around when Daniel Craig as 007 wore 2500 POs back in "Casino Royale" etc days....
( ... though it was Jeremy Clarkson wearing his to Burma, the North Pole etc on BBC Top Gear that convinced me. He still wears it, on The Grand Tour, Clarkson's Farm etc.)

The 2500 PO is not as thick as the iterations which followed, and wears slimmer to the wrist than those that I've tried.

I have both of mine on the later 8500 bracelet for various improvements, ease of adjustments (screws instead of pins & sleeves), & both have 117STZ001154 micro-adjustable steel clasps fitted. Common mods awhile ago.

Although I wear mine on a strap (or single-pass NATO) ½ the time, I also wear it on the bracelet a lot, & have never once "found it to be freakishly thick."

Apologies for the horrendous glut of pics, but hopefully gets the point across better than any more words :

View attachment 16249329

View attachment 16249328

View attachment 16249338

View attachment 16249339

View attachment 16249345

View attachment 16249348

View attachment 16249349

View attachment 16249350

View attachment 16249351

View attachment 16249372

View attachment 16249371

View attachment 16249375

View attachment 16249385

Find whats best for you, Pirateninja - just trying to illustrate the 2500 PO is not "freakishly thick", but a very comfortable and wearable classic dive watch. Good luck whatever you decide (y)

EDIT : - Pics on my 7" wrist
( ...but can swell to 7.25" in the summer heat & humidity here).
Damn man. You've almost convinced me to buy one, and I already bought and sold mine off years ago :D
And definitely not "freakishly thick." 14mm is nothing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
I’m late to the party here but I would definitely go for the planet ocean. I have one from each generation and while I love them all the new ones are unmatched. They are incredible and while they are larger at 43.5, they wear smaller than their size. My wrists are 7 3/8 and I thought it would be too big. My sweet spot was always the 42mm but I am just as happy with the larger size. I would try it at an AD if you have one near you. I have the white dial/orange bezel. I bought it on the stainless and then ordered the NATO from Omega directly (bottom middle). If you like the smaller size try the previous gen (you can see all the generations next to each other below). Good luck and happy hunting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,487 Posts
The 39.9mm model from a few years ago, was the perfect size. Such a shame they discontinued it. I regret selling mine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
I have a 7” inch wrist, pretty flat, and I went with the blue 43.5mm PO 8900 when I paid off my student loans this year. I love it. The twisted lugs really minimize the visual bulk of the watch. Looking down at it, it doesn’t appear much bigger than my skx. It’s thick, but for me it wears very comfortably. Also, if you like rubber straps track down the one from the good planet gmt. It fits perfectly and lightens things up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
The 42mm 2500 is perfect for me.The 8500 series is not anything I'd consider, however. The larger case and hand set don't talk to me.
It's everything on your wish list tommy_boy!Have you considered the most desirable PO LMLE, perhaps the Holy grail of the line, that featured the very first use of Liquidmetal?
I regret not buying it many years ago when I had the chance now prices have skyrocketed way...way beyond the MSRP

All Photos courtesy of @Superdoc
@ RJKama


 
41 - 60 of 73 Posts
Top