Reply With Quotelovely watch, I have a seamaster 120 from 1999 but yours looks a lot better to be honest. good pick
A few years ago, I'd not have considered buying a Seamaster. I thought they looked a bit bland, and really didn't get the crown-operated HEV (I still don't, in fact) for which there are seemingly far better design options. Over time, though, I've really warmed to them as an all-purpose watch and for the last couple of years I've been keeping a beady eye out for the right one to come along - not just here, but everywhere. I've missed a couple, rejected dozens, but a few days ago an absolute beauty was listed on SC by one of our resident watchmakers. In fact, by an ex-Omega watchmaker, no less.
The watch I wanted was the iconic, sword-handed 2254.50; not the most modern watch and superseded by god knows how many skeleton-handed, Bond or otherwise successors. Dated though it might be, the 2254.50 still houses a genuinely good movement in the calibre 1120. To quote John Holbrook from The Seamaster Reference Page:
In terms of looks, most people will know this watch, and will already have formed an opinion. In summary, though, the case is 41mm without the crown, wears very flat on the wrist and features the usual mix of brushed and polished facets that Omega does so well. The multi-sided bezel is as smooth as silk to operate, and the crown nestles nicely between the quite tapered guards. What I really like about the 2254.50, though, is the dial and hands; the former is the wave pattern - shame Omega ditched that for far less interesting alternatives) and the hands are the aforementioned sword style. I absolutely love the hands, in fact, and they're the primary reason that I wouldn't go for any other model in the Seamaster range. (Well, that and the fact that I wanted a mechanical movement.)The Omega cal. 1120 is an amazing movement, and an excellent choice for this watch. The movement was first introduced in 1996, and Omega uses the ETA 2892-A2 as the base ebauche, and heavily modifies it to produce the 1120. The base ETA 2892-A2 is widely considered the best movement ever produced by ETA (first introduced in 1975, with a lineage going back much further with Eterna). Many, many high end watch manufacturers (like IWC and Cartier) also use the 2892-A2 as a base movement. Why? Well, cost is no doubt a factor. However, I submit that many watch companies all come to the same conclusion: They could spend the money to design and manufacture their own movement in-house and still not match the technical marvel which is the 2892-A2. Don’t take my word for it – research the treasure trove of articles on Timezone by such horological luminaries as Walt Odets and others who closely examine the attributes of the 2892-A2.
All in all, a fantastic watch, and a long-time target now acquired. I've not had time to set any lights up as yet, but hopefully the shots below will suffice, albeit that they're a bit Q&D.
lovely watch, I have a seamaster 120 from 1999 but yours looks a lot better to be honest. good pick
Congrats, they are lovely pieces.
Really like that Tony. Don't wear mine half as much as I should do.
Completely agree on the comment about it wearing flat, amazed how flat it feels once it's on
Malc
Very nice Tony. You really cannot go wrong with that model :-)
A very nice watch, like yourself I really like those hands.
I couldn't agree more. I bought the exact model 3 weeks ago as my first ever 'proper' watch and posted pics on here. I've had numerous compliments on it since from my watch wearing buddies (though non watch-savy people dont seem to notice of course!). Not too blingy but very elegant. Love it
Yeah, I like these a lot. Amazing lume and classic, understated looks. A great watch.
I'm not wanting to be a detractor T, and usually I'm not.. But this is the only forum favourite that I genuinely don't understand the appeal of.
Great photos though, despite the excuses about lighting ;-)
I absolutely love the 2254, it's the only watch I have ever bought and not flipped.
A nice watch and great photos.
A solid, workmanlike watch.
Frankly, visually I don't find it exciting even if it is nice enough.
But, every collectuon deserves one and is a reliable workhorse
Nice pics as usual.
I think these a great watches, and have worn the GMT version primarily for nearly 10 years. This particular model suffers from having the He-crown (not on the GMT) and a fat bezel font which can look slightly jarring (as does the GMT). Are these elements which put you off? The bezel was a PITA initially but now I can turn it easily, not sure how my fingers have changed!Originally Posted by verv
Personally, I love it. Such a flat wearing watch, the wavy dial is fantastic (even under x35 magnification), the twisted lug design is quirky and the lume is superb. The sword hands are my favourite, you can quibble that the seconds hand (unattractive rectangular section) but that is a VERY minor quibble. I think it's a fantastic watch, everything you could wish for in a daily watch frankly. I hope the OP enjoys it for some time to come.
The official bracelet options are another bonus. Yes, Rolex has a micro adjust which I sorely miss, but you have the non-tapered Bond bracelet, the tapering Speedy bracelet as per the OP, a lovely rubber strap (of decent length and narrow spacings for a good fit) - and that is before you have the non-case-curved options of mesh, deployants and (ahem) NATO.
I think it's the scalloping of the bezel, the sweep of the crown guards and the flow of the bevelling on the lugs.
Having considered my opinion, I think it's because my taste is very austere and angular/sharp lines which is in opposition to most of the design elements of the seamaster.
Very nice Tony. I have been close to buying one of these myself at various points, over the years. I have never quite got round to it. But now that I have found the right one, I shall wait patiently!
All the best.
John
The 2254 is a fantastic looking watch , love the hands , lume and dial , a superb watch .
I have not been too sure about the standard version , but recently been smitten by the 50th anniversary GMT version. It has just a bit extra interest in terms of the bezel and GMT hand.
It seems like a high value version of the GMT ii Master to me!
Very nice.
Chap at work wears one and it certainly has wrist presence. Another to add to the wish list I think.
It definitely looks better with the less fussy bracelet that yours has.
Progress ;-)
I treasure my 2254.50. It's a watch that I wouldn't be without, having obtained one courtesy of an illustrious forum member almost a year ago. I love the dial and hands, it's extremely legible, very comfortable, and an excellent timekeeper. It's one that I regularly grab to take on trips as I'm happy to wear it for days on end and it always brings a smile to my face.
Your photographs really do it justice, Tony.
That really is an iconic watch - enjoy it!
It really is!
I used to have a 2003 GMT II - black and red bezel, lovely looker. Thing is, various items niggled. The crown is tiny (the current model has the TripLock crown but a fatter case, and 24 click bezel). The GMT hand arrow is pretty big, way back in the 50's it was smaller and better, which the Omega is closer to. The Rolex bezel font is nicer by far. Hand design is a personal choice but for me, sword hands look nicer.
The cyclops did bug me, the parallax of the minute hand put me off but did I give it enough time? Who knows?
Ultimately, had I kept the Rolex it would have appreciated in value. The Omega has (a bit) but in absolute £££ the Rolex was the better investment. That said, I buy to wear and the Omega still makes me smile. The wavy dial, the case-fitted bracelet and strap options - if you get one I am sure you will enjoy it. Watch cases are getting unnecessarily thicker and fatter, this is a design that will stand the test of time.
Definitely a modern classic, looks lovely, much better in my opinion than the blue Seamaster, the hands make it.
(you have lights?)
Lovely watch Tony and just so, so slim.
Popping over to a friend's this afternoon and no doubt we'll swap watches for a bit - he has a 16610 Sub in the box, it's amazing just how slim watches of this era are to the wrist. What happened?!
had one, but could't get the click with it irl. But everytime i see picture of one i'm tempted!
- - - Updated - - -
had one, but could't get the click with it irl. But everytime i see picture of one i'm tempted!
I have the quartz version and it has become my go to watch and gets more wrist time than any other at the moment. Your are right Tony it wears very slim, which isa bonus when you are as clumsy as I am. A classic in my opinion and one of my keepers. Great pics as always.
I've go the GMT II and the Omega 2264 SMP Quartz, with the sword hands. The latter are very much better for nighttime legibility thanks to the lume, and the combination of the SMP's hands and the domed sapphire ensures that the watch is easily readable at any time of day or night, whereas the Rolex has smaller hands, less lume and the cyclops obscures part of the dial and hands. Like you, I'd take the Rolex bezel font over the Omega, but despite the Rolex's shortcomings, it's the one that gets the most wear.
Most watches quickly become dated, while only a few stand the test of time and become classics. It's clear which way these are going! One of those watches that works 24/7, and a lovely example too.
Understatment there Tony.
You could take a pic of any watch and make it look desirable, not say the SMP fits in this category just highlighting your photography skills.
I do much prefer the current version with ceramic bezel but I Wish it had the sword hands of this model.
Lovely watch, I was after a quartz version just after they were discontinued but couldn't find any dealers with stock.
If only I had made my mind up a month or two earlier!
After thinking 'expensive' watches were ridiculous most of my life, a few years ago I woke up one day fancying a new watch. My initial thoughts were to get a radio-linked atomic clock type watch, but after some reading about I realised I wanted a mechanical watch. Then the real research started as I knew zero about watches!
Sadly I hadn't heard of TZ then - the Friday thread would have helped! I liked the look of the green bezeled Rolex Sub LV, but it was out of my price range (sadly, as it would have been a good investment). I also liked the look of the Speedmaster and Planet Ocean. But once I saw the 2254.50, and read a comparative review vs. the Submariner, then my mind was made up. After some haggling with Watchfinder I had one, and I was like an excited child when the postman delivered it!
They are great watches, and I love mine. I've since also bought a Speedie (from SC) and I strangely wear that more, although I've been wearing the Seamaster again recently (and even took it swimming this morning!).
I compared the 2254 with a colleagues new ceramic 8500 movement Seamaster - the new one is so much thicker! The new one also looks more 'blingy' - the 2254 looks more understated to me. They always get people's attention at the TZ GTGs too.
Enough rambling from me...love your photos as always Tony!
Almost the same reply from me, but in my case it's one of two watches I SERIOUSLY regret selling on.
2254's will be regarded as one of the brands Legends. Best Seamaster from that era, even better then Bond version. Lovelly piece Tony, enjoy!
My favourite Seamaster by a massive margin. In fact probably my favourite watch full stop. I will have one (again) some day. In fact I thought about going for one from here instead of the De Ville chronograph I was musing over a couple of weeks back, but I figured there'd always be good 2254s to be had, but not so much in the way of 145.017's so I went that way instead.
Love the photos, looking forward to more.
Last edited by minimoog; 5th April 2016 at 03:21.
I bought a quartz 2264 from a member here a few years ago. They come up fairly regularly, are exceptional VFM, and there's always watchrecon.com....
Lovely shots of a great watch, Tony, but that bezel is out and it bugs me
Congrats. I always learn something new from your incoming posts; keep buying more watches :-)
Actually, it's just the camera angle.Lovely shots of a great watch, Tony, but that bezel is out and it bugs me
Thank you!! I'm actually about to prepare an incoming post
Tony. Would that be that lovely AP? Martyn
Great watch, just had one incoming as well. Nice to have a slim and relatively light dive watch even on the bracelet. The current POs are lovely but a bit on the chunky side.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very nice, had a few back in the day and it remains one of my favourite Omegas...at the time its only real rival the 16610 only bettered it in the movement department. Else the bracelet, clasp, case etc... are superior in my eyes.
I would not take too much technical info out of John Holbrook's page...but he does know how to take good photo.
Enjoy that beauty!
Blimey Mr T don't you sleep? Look forward to the incoming pics & write up..
Very nice. Wear it in good health!
Sorry to hear that Tony.. Get well soon, lots of it around up here as well!
I really like the 2254. I couldn't understand why the skeleton hand model lasted longer than this one - to me this looks more modern.
I've had 3 seamsters before. The case is so comfortable, mainly due to it sitting flat.
This one would be high on my 'all time greatest' list.
Posting Permissions
