WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Watsup guys. So I'm planning on buying one of these respective models sometime soon as my very first luxury watch, I really love both for various reasons but I'm torn. Out of curiosity, which one do you guys prefer/recommend and why? Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,876 Posts
Got any pics for comparison?
 
  • Like
Reactions: delmar39

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,143 Posts
2220.80 is the later model, worn by Daniel Craig in Casino Royale. It's got a slight advantage over the older 2531.80 model. The 2220.80 has longer hour and minute hands.
This provides a little more contrast between hour and minute hands and provides a nicer balance overall on the dial.
The 2220.80 also houses the Calibre 2500D Co-Axial movement.
In saying that, though, I've had my 2531.80 since 1999 and only got it serviced a couple of years ago. It's bullet-proof.
However, if you want the later model, prior to the upgrade to glossy dial and whatever other changes that were made, then perhaps the 2220.80 may be the way to go.

Best of luck. Great watches either way.


EDIT: (15 mins later) - spelling. 'Cos it matters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
I've got the 2531.80 and love it.
As the differences between the 2 models are only slight it wouldn't matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,876 Posts
Both look the same, so go for the newer model with the updated movement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AngelDeVille

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
My vote goes for the 2220.80, for same reasons mentioned above. The dial of the 2220 speaks to me more as I love the pop of red with the word Seamaster, as well as the applied logo and indices, vs the 2531’s printed dial. The applied indices and logo just adds an extra level of depth to the dial for me.

Worth noting that the 2531 is marginally thinner in case height from the 2220 due to the differences in movement. Both movements are rock solid.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
2220.80 gets my vote as well. It's the one I wanted for myself years ago but didn't end up buying one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
Applied logo and indices plus co-axial of the later model would win the day for me... but availability, condition, service history, and price would also be factors. Good luck finding your choice!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
Is the latest SMP not in contention? Otherwise I vote 2220.80. The wave dial was, for me, what made the Seamaster the Seamaster, and I can't understand why Omega decided they needed to do away with it in favour of a boring plain dial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Another vote for the 2220.80. As mentioned by others above, the applied logo and indices make this one a bit dressier, and the co-axial movement gives it a bit of a technological edge. This could cut either way, but because it was made for a shorter period of time, it is a bit more rare than the 2531.80. All that said, they're both great and you can't go wrong either way!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
I'm not sure one should consider the movement of the 2220.80 an advantage? The co-axial escapement was still being finetuned by Omega and this movement had a revision a couple of years after. As at its core it's still the same ETA movement that you have in the 2531.80 so the co-axial escapement seems like an unnecessary complication that doesn't add many benefits.

Even though the 2220.80 is no doubt more luxurious with its applied markers, I personally prefer the more toolish looks of the 2531.80. And it's the design that started the revival of Omega so it has more historical value.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,743 Posts
I'm not sure one should consider the movement of the 2220.80 an advantage? The co-axial escapement was still being finetuned by Omega and this movement had a revision a couple of years after. As at its core it's still the same ETA movement that you have in the 2531.80 so the co-axial escapement seems like an unnecessary complication that doesn't add many benefits.

Even though the 2220.80 is no doubt more luxurious with its applied markers, I personally prefer the more toolish looks of the 2531.80. And it's the design that started the revival of Omega so it has more historical value.
i had a similar dilemma before. If i wanted history, the older one prevails. But if i really want history, it should be the quartz version that i should go for. Goldeneye. The first James Bond watch of Omega. Princess Diana also gifted Prince William with him.

Since i prefer a mechanical watch, i decided to go with what i like and i like the look of the Casino Royale more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,847 Posts
If future values are of any concern to you then there really is only one way to go.
The 2220 will always be the bastard brother of the 2531.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Is the latest SMP not in contention? Otherwise I vote 2220.80. The wave dial was, for me, what made the Seamaster the Seamaster, and I can't understand why Omega decided they needed to do away with it in favour of a boring plain dial.
I much prefer the old wave dials. I'm not a huge fan of the laser etching on the newer ones personally.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,268 Posts
i had a similar dilemma before. If i wanted history, the older one prevails. But if i really want history, it should be the quartz version that i should go for. Goldeneye. The first James Bond watch of Omega. Princess Diana also gifted Prince William with him.

Since i prefer a mechanical watch, i decided to go with what i like and i like the look of the Casino Royale more.
I agree, but chose history (quartz 2541 version).
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top