New Planet Ocean’s

Is the George Daniels escapement holding them back with the sizing? If so, should they reluctantly drop it?

The coaxial escapement added a bit of thickness, but it shouldn’t affect the diameter and lug to lug. They do make a sub 40mm Planet Ocean, for example.

I would argue that Omega are serious about the sizes. They make what sells. When people stop buying Omegas because they are “too large,” then Omega will stop selling them. I wonder how many units of those 39mm Planet Oceans they sell annually compared to the larger models. I suspect not very many.

And I am not arguing that larger watches are better, simply making a somewhat educated guess that Omega sells more of its larger models than its smaller models. So, they keep going with what works. Also a guess, but I think it fits with the attitude of conspicuous consumption and that if you are paying that much for a watch, then you want to feel it on your wrist and let everyone else in the room see what you are wearing.

The green chrono looks great. The height may put some folks off.

In addition to this and the mentioning of the roughly 40x46x14mm version, the domed crystal and sloped bezel makes the large version feel less absurd. When I tried one on, it honestly didn't feel notably larger than my GSAR. The GSAR isn't a sleek watch, but I like it a lot. I also like the 43.5mm planet ocean a lot, even if I would like it a touch more if it was more like a 42mm case and 14mm thick, which is precisely where the SMP300 lands.

Good call. I just can’t help but feel if they trimmed them down a bit they’d sell more. Whenever I try one I am like no way. I’d argue that when you are paying so much you want something that is more refined? Maybe the lug to lug and case sizing is to try and soften the blow of the thickness?

Perhaps, but please remember you are psycho.

Excuse me? I’m a Grand Psycho 😁

My apologies.

As @caktaylor said, the movement is a bit thicker from the escapement, but not by a huge amount. And even if it did, Omega is so associated with the coaxial escapement, there's no way that they would abandon that.

The truth is, I think that this is simply a styling decision. Omega makes some thinner, automatic watches (the DeVille 36.5mm is only 8.5mm tall). I wouldn't expect a 600m diver to be 9mm tall (but oh my if there was!), but ~14mm feels like it should be possible considering that a 500m Sinn is 11mm thick and a 1000m Mühle Glashütte clocks in at 13.5mm

As it stands, I think that the green is outstanding, just too big 😁

For me I also always think that Omega can bring the size of their dive watches down a little bit. Cool for dive watches to be big but 42mm+ isn't always for everyone.

The irony of the diameter discussion is that those of us that actually dive with watches don’t want them too small as they’re not as easy to read underwater.

But yeah the thickness is the only thing holding me back from a planet ocean… when they realised the titanium version I figured that would solve the top heavy feeling… and then I saw the price of it 😮😮😮

I think the co-axial escapement is one of the reasons for the thickness issue. Another reason has historic reasons. Most of their (base) movement architectures were developed during a time when big and bold watches were the way to go.

They still use the movement architecture from that time. That holds them back when it comes to the proportions.

I‘m not sure if they will develop thinner movements anytime soon. There current formula seems to work fine for them.

I would prefer to have closed case backs on most Omega watches. This would reduce the thickness at least a bit. To be honest the mass produced and fully machine finished movements are not a joy to look at.

Why is the beige 3 hand more expensive then the green and grey one? Makes no sense it’s the same watch! Or maybe someone needs to tell me why they’re charging a premium…

For what it's worth, the Omega 8800 has the same dimensions as an ETA 2824, ie 25.6mm wide and 4.6mm thick. Back in the 80s (I think) Rolex designed an Oyster case for their Tudor line with that movement, it is 9.5mm thick with 100m WR. The CW12 is a little thicker and has a see through caseback. The Ginault Ocean Rover II has a SW200, which is a clone of the 2824 of course, and is around 11mm thick with 300m WR. There is no need for those Seamaster 300m and Aqua Terra cases to be thick. But they are. At this point it can only be incompetence and self sabotage...

I think you need to try on before judging the size as too big, many watches are able to wear better than the numbers would imply. I have a 6.7" wrist and am wearing a Seiko MM300 that works (abeit on the edge of working).

Seiko looks great. Agree with you, I have tried the PO's, my friend has a 43mm from ~15 years ago, which is a bit big, then when they brought the newer ones out they Were even thicker. For me personally they are just too thick. Tonneau shaped pieces such as the Seiko Turtle, Willard etc wear smaller than their width would suggest and are deliberately big, with short lugs which allow this. The PO's just seem to be too unnecessarily thick and unrefined. Just my opinion.

At least in its defense, Omega managed to keep L2L under 50mm.

I see your point about thickness, but I guess I don't care too much about thickness as you all do (mostly because I don't usually wear suits and don't need to put my watch under cuffs), I put L2L on higher priority instead for usual wearability.

I guess on bracelets PO is a pretty heavy beast, but on these rubber straps, it would be much more wearable IMO.

When I was young on my watch collecting journey, I tried to avoid anything 42mm+, but after trying some watches which are still wearable with big case, my perception is changing a bit. (which makes it harder for me to judge sizes only on pictures in internet 😂)

FYI: My wrist is 6.5 inch, so not exactly big 😅

Omega just perfect for me