Rolex Deepsea Challenge Watch Doesn't Even Compare to Omega... 

This. Rolex is simply a tangible commodity investment. It’s not even a watch anymore.

😂

💀

Don’t worry, The collapse of Chinas middle class will soon allow for list free purchases as the grey market gets flooded.

@@2steaksandwiches665 not even a worthy investment anymore as well

Maybe if we actually been to the moon it would be cool

​@@Tacteyecoolthe moon is flat

@@SB-Kiwi and the Earth is dodecagon

@@TacteyecoolAHSAHSHAH

F

Typical celebrity rubbish.

He played it safe and never made any jokes about Jada Pinkett Smith.

The Omega is also wearable whereas the Rolex is a dinner plate.

They should instead start putting the date you were added to the waitlist… for certain models this might be a fun (and more impressive) fact than some stupid shit about divers attaching watches to submarines

Original gas escape valve?

@@juicedupjunkie2324 That's part of it. But just to summarise: ORIGINAL GAS ESCAPE VALVE 👑 ROLEX OYSTER PERPETUAL DEEPSEA CHALLENGE SEA-DWELLER 36090ft = 11000m SUPERLATIVE CHRONOMETER OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED SWISS MADE RING LOCK SYSTEM It's personal preference, of course, but to me it's just not pleasing to have so much writing on the dial. I prefer a clean look.

Or just a backside?

@@wristroll_vlad good one 😆

The challenge is getting to the top of the wait list!

sickest Burn ive read so far! Kudos mate

😆😆😆

As well every diver uses dive computers, way more features like depth gauge, decompression levels, fast ascend warning etc. Some use a watch as a backup. And there i prefer a Gshock or a Casio Duro.

I really dislike dive watches with any more than 300m of water resistance because every additional meter of WR means additional weight and thickness THAT I NEITHER NEED NOR WANT. I was so disappointed wiht Omega's new 6000m line - some of the color combinations are gorgeous but the weight and thickness due to the ridiculous WR rating they have just absolutely ruins them.

@@LanguagesWithAndrew the Omega Ultra Deep is only slightly thicker than the Rolex Deep-sea but goes way deeper. The thickness is very reasonable given the insane WR. The Rolex Challenge has crossed the line into ridiculous.

That not the point.

Whuch one you got yourself ? I have the white dial and love it

@@dendee black dial and yellow accents regatta

The Ultra Deep is only slightly thicker at 18.1mm and is good for 6000m.

I'm happy with my Planet Ocean 600 and Deepsea James Cameron 126660. That enough.

I have been wearing my Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph for 23 years (before Co-axial time) and the watch had gone diving in Hawaii, swimming pool, hot tub, sauna and steam room in the gym. The most depth it had dived down to was about 50 feet and that was all I could take. These super deep dive watches are for people who appreciate a fine piece of craftsmanship and not particularly for everyday wearing. The Rolex is a very pretty watch and Omega is a watch you can actually buy any time without a ridiculously long waiting list as the Rolex, and Rolex price their watch out of reach for most people me included. By the way my 23 years old Omega had it first service two years ago and it is now running at about 1 and a half second fast per month, yes month not day. My Rolex Datejust two tone runs about 5 seconds fast per day. Not locking Rolex it is just my situation.

please tell me you got the Ti one? its gorgeous and something people might actually wanna wear.

I have a PO gmt too. Great watch. And I enjoy the open caseback

The PO doesn’t win, but it is a fantastic watch (in Blue 😎).

@@Dasani31 It’s just a three hand and Chronograph these days isn’t it? GMT Dive watch sounds niche.

@@DebmalyaSinha what a ridiculous comment 😂

This is simply incorrect. Nice try,

@@danbarrett3347 it is water resistant to as deep as it is possible to go on this earth - so it'll go 'just as deep'. The fact it's quartz is irrelevant (but I actually think divers watches are better being quartz) and obviously the use of oil is the reason it's wearable.

@@danbarrett3347 didn't need to go to the website, I already knew all of that information having previously owned the watch in question. Thank you for pointing out the bleeding obvious though. Its amazing how irate people can get about something like this. My original message simply said that Sinn made a watch that could go as deep and was actually wearable and much cheaper. All of those things are correct. If you don't like quartz, don't think it's a like for like comparison etc etc, that's another argument entirely. Who are you anyway the 'Rolega' marketing minister for idiotic watches?

@@danbarrett3347 oh dear.... I started this with "that is simply incorrect"? Might want to check who's name is next to that comment Dim... I mean Dan. The water resistance is how many metres? The deepest part of the ocean is how deep? I'm sorry, I don't see the contradiction 🤔 I do, however, see that you concede it can go as deep in a later paragraph after claiming it can't. Finally, and I didn't realise I was talking to an eleven year old ('haters'? Really?) I'm pretty sure that a subjective opinion is still allowed in these times. I'll qualify that opinion by saying that yes, I think a watch that is made for the wrist and measures 28mm deep is idiotic. Rolex and omega are only doing this for one up man ship over the other. Its marketing bragging rights by the two largest and largely most boring watch makers in Switzerland. They've done it so the accountant with the seamaster can justify his purchase over the accountant with the sub in they pub on a Friday night. ".... Yes, but omega hold the record for deepest dive..." Neither of whom have subjected their watches to anything deeper than the bath. Making a watch that functions at eleven thousand metres under the sea is idiotic. (in my opinion) The sinn is completely different - I agree with you here - as it is made to be as hard as nails. This watch will outlive you in any of your adventures. It's built to be tough as old boots and actually used. It is a functioning tool watch and not a marketing wet dream. I don't know who the chap was referring to when he said 'that is simply incorrect' but he was incorrect. You were correct in what you said and so was I. Can the Sinn go to the deepest part of our ocean without letting water in? Yes. Is it affordable? It's not cheap but it's much much much more affordable and attainable that the rolex or omega. Is it wearable? It's big but it's not crazy big.

Because it's the most annoying complication in the history of wrist watches. Who wants to hear the incessant dings from a watch because the asshole wearing it would rather count the chimes than look at the dial to see what time it is?

They got stuck at cyclops, jubilee bracelets and superlative.

Whoaaa easy there...that would involve actual innovation...Instead, here: have this dinner plate of a watch with a lower depth rating than the one we already made in the 1960's lol.

They would have to find someone to make it for them first and then they would claim to be the inventor of that type of watch.

it's true, we're all crazy, I have sd34 and jc deepsea, and for diving I use seiko mm300

Get ready, Omega is ready to go to Mars too.

But is harder to actually find a Rolex for sell on the ad than actually going to the moon

Bulova also went to the moon.

Rolex went to the bottom both on 60s & 2012, short maybe by 10-20 m. Difference is insignificant, plus Challenge rated for 15,000m. Rolex hardly kicking themselves. Omega only wishes they had Rolex brand mystique and cache.

@@joelburke289 rolex has never actually gone all the way and touch the very bottom of the trench. You know, touch the sand that’s down there.

Flavor Flav would wear it round his neck.

Any regular brute can wear the Ultra Deep whereas you would have to be Shaq to wear the ridiculous Rolex. That Rolex is crazy.

They’re really not to be thought of as regular watches.. more like showpieces of the tech. Historically too, the challenge is the production model of the 2012 unit, coaxed on by JCameron himself to compete against Omega.

@@joelburke289 Omega could also produce an unwearble 11000m beast. The problem is it wouldn't be a watch but a trophy. Rolex should have produced something to beat Omega but kept it wearable. 50mm by 23.5mm is crazy. I would have to strap that to my leg!

The dial size is the same as every other Rolex dive watch. It's not shrunk, it's just not sized up. The inner ring serves to prevent the watch from buckling under the extreme pressure at 11,000 meters due to the pressure difference between the air in the watch (1 bar) and the water outside (1,101 bar).

@@bloodymarvelous4790 At 2000m down (circa 200 atmospheres) the pressure would be so great a human diver would be crushed anyway. So the extra 9000m is pointless. Thus, that ugly inner ring, which gives impression of a shrunken dial, is simply useless for any real purpose. As I say, technically impressive but for everyday use out & about the watch is simply too big, too thick & too ugly. Will no doubt be a hit for collectors/investors/flippers but I personally buy to wear all my Rolex and so prefer them to sit modestly on wrist & look nice! Just my opinion 👍🏻

@Jay M our local swimming pool must be lower down on the list re council upgrade to such depths. We have to settle for a few meters, sadly. Even my 300m diver panics as I relax on the side 😆

@128-192 And you lost yours by liking your own comment 😂

wo wo wo ... Planet O ultra deep 45.5mm and 16or18mm thick right... it is big and thick but it is possible to wear... the challenge with 50mm and 23mm it is a old soviet's tank haha

you can't buy*

@@notsafefortorque9060 oh yea that's right, well in theory lol

Correct

@@stiggeltime9182 That makes it even more desirable. And no one's gonna wear it, considering its size (50x23mm).

Made up of unobtainium.

This watch comes with an 11 kilometer piece of string, and a boat ticket to the Mariana Trench so you can test it out. If the watch fails, Rolex guarantees they'll replace it for free, complete with a new boat ticket. You will need to reuse the string though.

The Omega did hit the bottom. Set there for a day before they could retrieve it and it was still keeping correct time. So, how can you go deeper?

The Omega Ultra Deep did hit the bottom.

its a novelty really... the thing is getting one even if you have the money.😅

YES

The Omega is also a wearable size whereas this is a dinner plate.

Actually,

😊

I'm a PADI open water scuba diver. I'm licenced to dive down to a maximum of 18 meters below sea level.

​@@aaddy5157 you're almost there, just 11 more kilometers

I don't think the Omega actually fell off, the expedition it was a part of carefully mapped the bottom of the trench and they went into the deepest part of it, something that neither Trieste nor Cameron's trip felt a need to do. The hosts have it right that if Rolex wants the title back they will probably have to go back with shovels and a bucket. I'm sure they can come up with some halfway plausible justification involving science, but time will tell.

@@jesstotten5571 an arm on the sub had to be detach and the Omega set there for 24 hours before they could back and retrieve it, but the Omega did touch the bottom. View the link. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vOHcXJX8wIw.html

Just Rolex doing what Rolex do best, claiming firsts that they never actually achieved.

You would rock a 50mm by 23.5mm watch?

@@almac9203 yes, as a showpiece, not regular watch. Even the deepsea gets weighty after a while and I have to cool it.

Means you and your party must slay at least twice your number of Omega ADs before you are allowed to have one.

One can only hope. Watches belong to the enthusiasts, not the profiteers.

Do you know anyone who has managed to buy that Omega then?