The Treasure Chest — The Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph
Note 1: In this article I provide many links to external sources. I provide these only for credit or further context, and no endorsement is implied. I do not receive any compensation from providing these links.
Note 2: If you do want to support my work on this site, please visit my SHOP page.
Whether you’ve been interested in watches for one year or ten, 2021 did not bring you any relief from the undercurrent of frustration that for the last half-decade or so has plagued the hobby. At this point, I’m sure everyone pines over at least a watch or two that is unobtainium, and discussing which one(s) is an easy ice-breaker at meetups.
Ironically, it’s also arguably never been an easier time to be into watches. Even as recently as the late 2000s, one had to brave clunky layouts and potentially hostile posters on a forum when researching a purchase; now, high-definition footage of more or less anything you can think of is just a few taps away.
These two situations are inherently inter-connected: the availability of information is inversely related to that of actual product, because though content proliferation has lowered the knowledge barrier to entry (this is excellent) it has also set the watch industry on a collision course with a consumer environment that rewards limited edition drops and “flexing” (this is not excellent).
If you can relate to the above paragraphs in any way, then you already know the underlying force enabling all of this: the same platforms that have the potential to provide exposure to all brands are underpinned by algorithms that serve you the same handful of watches from the same handful of influencers and celebrities.
I know I’ve set a grim scene here, particularly if you’ve had your sights set on a Rolex or a certain nautical Patek, but provided you’re willing to go a little bit against the grain, there are some absolutely phenomenal watches out there for you to score, at prices well below their original MSRP (sometimes shockingly so). Consider this your way of taking back the power originally promised by social media, and turning all of these tools and resources into true means of horological discovery.
A quick perusal of Chrono24 is all it takes to prove that Rolex, Patek and AP are the tiniest tip of the iceberg, and over most of my decade-plus in watches, I’ve had the most fun acquiring models that have been relatively overlooked. That guiding philosophy is the foundation for this new series, which I’m calling “The Treasure Chest”, where I propose to you watches that you can buy, right now, and that to me are far more compelling than what’s appearing ad-nauseam on your feeds.
This is not a “Value Proposition” series like you’ve read elsewhere. At best, a value proposition implies totally ignoring the irrational aspects of watches that make them so fun, in favor of a cold cost-benefit calculation. At worst, a value proposition implies something you settle for because you straight-up can’t afford something else. Neither are these watches “bargain bin”, clearance models that are trading for pennies on the dollar because they are undesirable.
Watches that appear in this series really are what I consider “hidden treasures”, that is to say models that I am confident could tempt more buyers, if only they were provided a second chance at more exposure. For this first entry, I’m going big (literally, more on that later…) with something from my own collection: a watch from a powerhouse brand, boasting a world-class movement with multiple complications, and very robust performance specs, all wrapped up in a design package that add up to a piece I believe would be worthy of a “Bond Watch” title.
Let’s now unearth the Omega 231.10.43.52.06.001, known more manageably (but only slightly) as the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph 43mm.
The Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph can not only be your adventure-ready sports watch, but also part of your daily, more upscale everyday carry loadout.
A watch with a rock-solid pedigree
The watch (which from now on I’ll just refer to as the Omega Chronograph 150M) has an unwieldy title, but the name provides a very clear roadmap with which to understand its history and by extension, its specifications.
Omega first unveiled the Seamaster line in 1948, intended to offer go-anywhere-do-anything (“GADA”) watches to consumers before such a term even existed. If you were a practical person who would never dream of owning more than one watch, but still needed one to accompany you from your early morning swims to your late afternoon meetings, this would be the line for you.
Over time, consumer tastes changed and the “Seamaster” designation became an ever-broader category of watches with a heavy emphasis on water-related capabilities. Today, the Seamaster line incorporates everything from the hard-core PloProf (short for “Plongée Profonde”, translated to “deep dive”), to the less hard-core but still highly capable 300M dive watches. If you like being around the water but perhaps don’t want something quite so purpose-built on your wrist, Omega also used the Seamaster category’s core attributes to launch what I believe is the closest modern interpretation of the original, 1948 Seamasters, the Omega Aqua Terra line.
Though Omega chose to be slightly fanciful with its wording, the name really does say it all: water and land. First released in 2002, the Aqua Terra line was meant to be the brand’s “surf and turf” watch for the new millennium, appropriately powered by the latest in mechanical technology (sort of, but that’s for another article) in the form of Omega calibre 2500. Based on the proven and still highly regarded ETA 2892, the 2500’s main differentiating factor was that it was regulated by a co-axial escapement rather than the original Swiss-lever escapement, supposedly allowing for longer service intervals. Omega also chose to have these movements COSC-certified, making the Aqua Terra watches official “chronometers”, from which the wearer could expect time deviations within -4/+6 seconds per day.
On top of these impressive internal specifications, Omega certified the Aqua Terra watches to have 150 meters of water resistance, which is more than adequate for most people’s aquatic adventures. Notably, this is also 50% more water resistance than the equivalent Rolex Explorer and Datejusts against which Omega no doubt wanted its Aqua Terra watches to stand toe-to-toe.
Omega could have stuck to the three-hand/date concept for its Aqua Terra watches and made consumers quite happy. But, for better or worse, the company has a history of deepening its product lines in a way that Rolex does not, and it’s from that impulse that the Aqua Terra line really started to become a heavy hitter.
Going beyond the three-hander
In the early 2000’s, Omega released the Aqua Terra Chronograph, powered by the calibre 3301, a column wheel chronograph based on the F. Piguet 1285, with 55 hours of power reserve and allowing for a relatively conventional three-register dial display. Notably, the movement did not have a co-axial escapement but the watch itself did maintain one of the defining characteristics of the Aqua Terra line, the 150 meters of water resistance, and it’s worth taking a slight detour to comment on this.
There are varying schools of thought in the watch community regarding the durability of mechanical movements and watches in general. Some will say that mechanical watches have gone to the tops of mountains and the depths of the oceans, so there is never any need to worry, while others will be careful to replace their Rolex with a G-Shock for a round of golf.
On the subject of chronographs, I’m not going to try and make the case that these are more or less fragile than less complicated movements; after all, it was a mechanical Omega chronograph that went to space! That said, I don’t think I’m going out on too much of a limb when I say that most people would be wary of taking their chronograph into the water, and save for dive chronographs, my feeling is that from the manufacturers’ point of view, water resistance is not a primary concern, even less so in the early 2000s when the original Aqua Terra Chronograph was first released.
All of this is to say that for these watches to have column-wheel chronograph functionality along with 150 meters of water resistance, with the versatile styling of the Aqua Terra line, really did (and still does) make for an impressive package, a true GADA watch.
Was Omega satisfied with this?
Of course not, and in true company fashion they forged ahead, which brings us to this article’s featured watch.
Making a case, for the case…
I took a risk putting the full name of the watch at the beginning of the article, because in that title is its case size, and by today’s standards, there’s no denying that the Omega Chronograph 150M is a large watch. That size is even more apparent when you consider the watch’s 17 mm thickness, but there are nevertheless some arguments to be made as to why this watch might still have a place in your collection.
Before I propose those to you, so as not to hide anything else, the full size specifications are as follows:
Diameter: 43 mm
Thickness: 17 mm
Lug width: 21 mm
Lug-to-lug: 51 mm (excluding bracelet end-links)
The key qualifier in the section’s first paragraph is “by today’s standards”, but I’d go farther than that to say it’s always disappointing to hear commenters reflexively dismiss any given watch just because it’s over 40 mm (or lately, 39 or 38 mm…).
As much as some of the more jaded hobbyists like to think Swiss watch companies don’t pay any attention at all to consumer preferences or otherwise stumble from day-to-day, oblivious to what’s happening around them, let’s be real here, Omega is a huge company with a long history, they did not get to where they are by accident. If this particular watch is large, it’s because that was the design intent, and someone at Omega had a fact-base available to inform that design intent.
Furthermore, we should not deny a watch’s right to exist for any reason, size included. If we don’t like a watch, we can move on to something else we do like, and be thankful that this industry is diverse enough that it can provide something for everyone. Today, the bell-curve for size may have shifted towards smaller watches, but that doesn’t mean there’s no place for offerings a few standard deviations away.
Finally, it’s important to put a watch in the proper context. I’m always baffled that people pay such high prices for vintage watches, given that a modern $200 micro-brand piece offers better build quality, but if consumers can properly contextualize a timepiece from the 50’s or 60’s, they should be able to do so for models from the 2000’s onwards (and I predict this will happen more naturally as “neo-vintage” watches become more desirable).
What I’m saying here is that I believe the Omega Chronograph 150M’s size is a deliberate feature, and all of the other aspects of the watch case flow from this size to create a watch with undeniable presence on the wrist, and an air of bulletproof capability.
With regards to materials, you can choose from steel, two-tone red gold, and full red gold with an associated red-gold bracelet. I have only ever seen one of these watches out “in the wild”, and that was steel; if I ever see someone with the full gold configuration, you can be 100% sure that I will go up to them and strike up a conversation, I’d be fascinated to learn more about a person that makes such a choice. If that’s you, please do get in touch, but if you’re having to choose I recommend the steel option as in my opinion that gets you closest to what I believe was the watch’s original design intent.
Nominally, the case is brushed and polished, but in reality, the polishing is what you’re going to see most when you read the dial. Indeed, the case’s bezel and the beveled portion of Omega’s signature “lyre” lugs are polished. As proof of attention to detail, Omega also polished the tops of the lozenge-shaped pushers and their chamfers, so you see almost unbroken polish when you look down at the dial, with the only exception being the innermost part of the lugs, which are brushed. This is a subtle detail but it makes a big difference, because had those been polished as well, the front-view of the watch would be overwhelming and the lug geometry would not be nearly so defined.
The flanks of the case are brushed, which does a lot to tone down the watch from the point of view of an observer not wearing the watch, and again, in a show of attention to detail, the face of the chronograph pushers is brushed to match the flanks.
The screw-down crown is nicely done, with a raised, polished Omega logo contrasted against a matte background. The crown is deeply channeled, allowing for very good grip, and the rounded tops of the channels are polished to be consistent with the rest of the case’s top down view, but the grooves are matte for contrast, again so that the wearer can more easily appreciate the component’s geometry.
Overall, it’s clear that this is a premium case, but if you remain unconvinced about its size, I see three mitigating factors at play:
The lug width is relatively restrained, and on my 6.5” (16.5 cm) wrist, the lugs do not hang over, rather the watch lays nicely across it. There is almost a “Turtle” effect at play here, whereby the squat shape of that case makes a 45mm watch wearable on a variety of wrists (please see photo below for a comparison with a “King Turtle” and a Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic 38mm).
The choice of strap is critical and makes a world of difference on the Omega Chronograph 150M’s wearability.
As I start building the argument that this could have been a Bond watch, consider that the size of the watch is what contributes to its GADA design intent, in that you really do feel as if you’re capable of anything with something this substantial by your side.
The Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph is certainly large when compared to something like the 38mm Hamilton Khaki Field, but looks much more manageable when compared to a Seiko King Turtle.
The strap choice is a factor over which you have the most control, so let’s examine the options, and what I’d recommend if your interest is now piqued.
When choosing a strap, ignore the first tenet of watch buying
You can perhaps say that the first rule of watch buying is “buy the seller”, but let’s assume that the buyer has done all their due diligence, and now actually has to choose what to buy. At that point, it’s basically a given in the watch community to always buy the metal bracelet option, because the markup relative to other options is less (sometimes far less when considering more premium brands) than having to buy the bracelet as an OEM accessory.
More and more, I’m finding that I disagree with this adage. If your gut tells you that you would prefer another option and that you don’t imagine yourself wearing the bracelet that much, run with that; you’ll save money on having to purchase the OEM strap down the road, and it will effectively cost you more if you do that because you’re paying full price for it rather than the “discounted” rate relative to the bracelet.
This comes from experience, and in fact I first made the mistake of dogmatically buying the bracelet on this watch. The build-quality of the bracelet is not worth going into, because aesthetically, for me it is a non-starter. The sheer amount of actual and visual volume that this much metal adds to an already large watch makes the full-steel configuration all but unwearable for anyone but the largest and/or most attention-seeking buyer.
In steel, this watch was originally offered on either the bracelet or a leather-strap option, the latter appearing in blue to match the blue-dialed version of the watch, and in brown to accompany the black-dialed and white-dialed Omega Chronograph 150M’s.
I bought the bracelet out of principle but also bought a cheap aftermarket brown strap with deployant clasp off of eBay. That was immediately what went on my wrist, and with this setup, you have something that I wouldn’t call a dress watch, but certainly a “business casual” watch that goes well with office attire, provided you’re not concerned about your watch always hiding under your shirt/sweater/jacket cuff. Just like when you’re cooking a meal where the goal is to balance out one flavor with another, pairing the Omega Chronograph 150M with a subdued strap goes a very long way to making the watch much more wearable than its specifications first imply.
I fully learned my lesson two years or so later when I bit the bullet and bought the official Omega leather strap with deployant clasp, which cost…
$650 USD!
I truly would have been better off just buying the strap option, but here’s something you may want to consider as well, if you’re still with me on going after the Bond look.
This was not offered as part of the original package, but a NATO goes a long way to making this model even more of a GADA piece. I’m relatively anal when it comes to keeping my watches factory, so I opted for a pricey, black Omega option, but surely you can find something much more affordable, even with the awkward 21 mm lug spacing.
Yes, this does add to the thickness of the watch, but I believe the trade-off in capability is worth it. On a leather strap, you have a very nice, more-than-capable office watch. But, put it on a NATO and you can really unleash its full potential; if you’re bothered about the added thickness, there are two-piece fabric/sailcloth options out there, but you’ll have to stick to the aftermarket as I have not found OEM offerings for 21 mm lug widths.
In short, ignore the bracelet, get the leather strap with deployant buckle, and explore adding a textile option.
The dial is the bow around the whole package
I bought my own Omega Chronograph 150M in early 2018, after research that started in 2017, and had the model line stopped at the three register versions, I probably would have thought “ok, that’s nice”, and moved on. It’s not that the three-registers turned me off in any way specifically, it’s just that the layout is so conventional, I wouldn’t have thought twice about it before moving on.
The fact is though that the Aqua Terra line did evolve to have two registers, and when you compare across generations, it’s hard not to see the immediate appeal of the balance provided by this layout.
What’s more impressive is just how much information Omega was able to squeeze into those two registers and still keep things readable. On the right register you’re able to read an elapsed hour counter going up to twelve, and a sixty-minute counter; this is not a small detail, since this is more practical and less common than the thirty-minute counter you find on many other chronographs. On the left register you’ll find the elapsed seconds hand, as well as the GMT (more on that in the movement section of this article).
The hand-set associated with these registers and the dial overall is pure Aqua Terra, with the arrow minute hand easily differentiated from the dauphine-style hour hand. The counter hands are all similar, but smaller, dauphine style, except for the GMT which is a smaller version of the arrow minute hand, accented in red on my model (with the number 24 also in red for further ease of reading). Yes, at first it can be a little bit confusing to get your bearings, but in no time you’ll appreciate the thought that went into making so much information so easily accessible.
Adding to the sports-watch GADA nature of the watch is that it is lumed, with the applied indices glowing along with the hour, minute (not the whole unfortunately), chronograph seconds and GMT hands.
If there is one weak point of the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph, it’s the lume; it’s relatively, well, weak.
Turning to dial construction, it’s clear that like the case this is a premium component in the sense that so many steps go into its construction. It starts with the dial blank which is painted black, onto which are printed the outboard chronograph track and the inboard tracks of the registers. From there, the vertical “teak deck” pattern is applied via two semi-circular halves; this provides an appearance of depth, further reinforced by the applied markers and “Omega Seamaster GMT” texts.
I’m not usually so particular about my watches that I comment on a font. Unless the fonts are so integral to the design (Hermès most immediately comes to mind) that they stand out, I’ve never gone to the point of noticing a font style amongst all the other details on a watch…
Except for this one.
To me, the fonts capture Omega’s brand identity well, in the sense that it’s a sleek, tech-forward luxury goods company. When I look at the pairing of the three words, with the pop of red for “GMT”, I’m immediately hit by visions of Zero Halliburton aluminum briefcases, and Porsche 911s (whose font on the back to me looks similarly evocative).
It’s perhaps not the teak deck of a yacht Omega was going for, but certainly it’s on the same mood board, and if I also said it made me think of black tuxedos, wouldn’t it then be an easy leap to “Bond watch”? I think so, provided one chooses the black dial (which Omega refers to as grey, because it is indeed in some light) over white or blue.
The dial of the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph is well done, especially the black/grey option.
In a way, Omega were quite forward-looking with this watch, as I don’t think “blue” was considered a trend yet in the early 2010’s, and white didn’t really come fully back into the spotlight for them until the release of their own white-dialed Seamaster 300M.
Of course, everyone should follow their own tastes and if you own or want to own the white or blue dial options, that’s fantastic. But again, in reference to what I assume is the GADA design intent of the watch, black is the color that really pulls everything together.
The black dial allows you to wear the watch on that leather strap to the office, then put it on your NATO or two-piece textile strap and turn it into a high-end adventure companion that will be just as at home on the ski-slopes as it will be in the après-ski lodge.
And a final, crucial (for many of you) note: the date is at 6 o’clock on a color-matched date wheel, which is the final touch of symmetry on the Omega Chronograph 150M’s dial.
A movement that is still highly impressive
I strongly believe that there is no better manufacture than Omega when it comes to industrializing high-tech, mechanical movements. Sure, there’s something to be said for Rolex’s incremental approach, but Omega is constantly swinging for the fences and the updated Aqua Terra chronograph series is an excellent example of their efforts.
In 2009 after the initial volley of Aqua Terra chronographs, Omega upgraded them with another F. Piguet-based movement, the 3313, with the most significant modification being the incorporation of the co-axial escapement. In 2013, as part of Omega’s efforts to bring its calibers in-house, the brand really went all out for the release of the latest Aqua Terra chronographs, outfitting them with calibre 9605.
We are now nearly a decade on from this watch’s release and I still have trouble thinking of anything from a competing brand that can match this movement. The 9605 gives you a laundry and grocery list of features:
Automatic winding
60 hours of power reserve
Bi-register, column wheel chronograph with 60 (not 30) minute counter
Twin barrel architecture allowing for better isochronism
Traveler style GMT, allowing for jump-setting of the hour hand without hacking the balance wheel
Silicon balance spring with free sprung balance wheel
Nicely decorated, with Omega’s signature “arabesque” circular waves, visible via a see-through caseback
The movement of the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 150M Co-Axial Chronometer GMT Chronograph, calibre 9605, is still a powerhouse (Image source: Omega website).
For all the positives of this movement, three downsides come to mind. First, there is no quick-set date feature (I haven’t seen this on any other traveler GMT’s though) . Second, though I couldn’t confirm this, I understand the 9605 is a modular as opposed to an integrated chronograph movement. If that’s true, I’d love to see Omega’s take on an integrated equivalent in the future as I think it would do a lot to decrease the next hypothetical Omega Chronograph 150M’s thickness. Third, Omega has apparently been cutting off parts access to non-Omega factory watchmakers and I seem to remember during my research for this watch before buying it that special tooling was required to hold and work on these new in-house chronograph movements. As a result, I would expect a low four figure service bill, in US dollar terms and likely euros also.
Those considerations aside, if you’re at all like me in factoring technology into your watch buying decision, this movement is one to pay attention to. Who am I though? The more important question when discussing any non-Moonwatch Omega is: would Bond or Q have paid attention to it?
After all, technology and gadgets are a key part of the Bond movies’ appeal, so what to make of this watch if we bring the Omega Chronograph 150M into a discussion of Bond watches?
What makes a Bond watch?
Watch enthusiasts have a love-hate relationship with marketing. On one hand, I’ve lost count of the amount of times I’ve heard or read “I wish watch companies would stop passing on the overhead of brand ambassadors, it just doesn’t work with me”, but on the other hand, brands have such high marketing overhead precisely because it absolutely works!
When talking about luxury goods, there is so much more to the perceived value of a product than its parts, which is why watch brands take such seemingly outlandish and expensive steps to create “worlds” in which to invite potential customers.
In consumer goods generally, a fantastic example of this is Ralph Lauren, who pretty much created Northeastern prep (among other worlds) in the minds of everyone not born into this small community, and then built an empire off of that. In watches, it’s why IWC and Breitling lean heavily into the world of aviation, or why Rolex bills itself as the watch of great adventurers and dignitaries, or…
Why Omega is so proud of its connection to James Bond, a fictional secret agent.
It sounds so ridiculous doesn’t it? Luxury watches, a product that many would argue is completely unnecessary, are targeted towards successful (mostly) men by trying to make them feel as if they could be an international man of mystery and intrigue.
It really does sound crazy, but it absolutely works, because as soon as a new Bond movie is announced, the watch-internet immediately starts speculating about what will be on his wrist. Watch buyers can say until they’re blue in the face that they’re oblivious to marketing, but the data clearly says otherwise, as Omega’s CEO Raynald Aeschlimann has stated that the Bond/Omega connection does drive sales. From the brand’s perspective, all they have to do is get one person to believe they’ll feel a little bit cooler in their watch than another brand’s as they head to their cubicle, and they’ve already created several thousand dollars worth of return on their marketing spend.
So, back to the Omega Chronograph 150M; in the black dial configuration with a NATO strap, in the context of a slightly absurd conversation about “would James Bond wear this”, I can make the case that “yes, he would”. The watch has high-tech specs, a modern design language, and size, presence, and capabilities that provide reassurance it won’t let him down during a mission.
Why then have other watches been granted the “Bond” crown, and therefore attention and sales at the expense of the Omega Chronograph 150M? Why is this watch now a hidden treasure?
The answer lies in the original question itself, or rather a rephrasing of the question. “What would Bond wear” is a fun if silly discussion among watch geeks, but let’s put ourselves in Omega’s shoes and instead ask:
“What should Bond wear to further our strategic goals?”
That is far from silly, it is in fact a several million dollar/euro question. Asked that way, it becomes obvious (sorry if it already was to you) that Omega doesn’t perhaps put the most “Bond” watch on his wrist. Rather, Omega selects the watch or watches that stand(s) to bring the most benefit to the company from being a Bond watch.
My understanding is that this is exactly the train of thought that led to the original 300M ending up on Pierce Brosnan’s wrist. The original Seamaster 300M was released in 1993, and Jean-Claude Biver was tasked with bringing luster back to the brand. Goldeneye was releasing in 1995, Biver wanted to turbocharge sales of Omega’s new signature diver, and the rest is history (note this deliberate move is very different from Connery’s Sub, which was put on his wrist because that’s what a producer had at the time during filming).
The Omega Chronograph 150M was released between Skyfall and Spectre, and given the lead times involved in these deals I think it could have plausibly appeared in either. Instead, the honor went to the Planet Ocean, the Seamaster 300 and the three-hand Aqua Terra.
From a strategic point of view, it makes total sense, as these are Omega’s bread and butter watches and the company knew it could sell a boatload of Bond and regular versions from the movie exposure. Furthermore, while today’s discussed watch is far more “gadgety” and therefore “Bond-y”, the complexity makes it a very niche product. This brings the potential to confuse the mainstream consumer, who just wants something straightforward that makes him or her feel like they are a bit more adventurous than perhaps they really are.
Why does any of this matter?
Because it’s at the heart of why the Omega Chronograph 150M is overlooked, perhaps as much as the size. To me, this watch was passed over because it falls outside of Omega’s strategically core products and consequently its marketing efforts. That doesn’t mean you will daydream about being a secret agent any less in this watch than another, and keep in mind that if the 43mm size is holding you back, the Skyfall Planet Ocean was only slightly smaller at 42mm…
Pricing and competition
When this watch was announced in 2013, the steel version started at USD9,150 (excluding sales tax). Let’s be realistic and assume a 15% AD discount, meaning you’d be looking at, again excluding taxes, just over USD7,775.
The watch landscape was very different back then, and you could have easily scored a Rolex Datejust or a used Submariner for that money. If the GMT functionality mattered, a GMT Master-II or Explorer II would also have been feasible. If you looked beyond Rolex you’d find many other fantastic watches at that price.
These are fuzzy alternatives though, because I am at a loss to come up with a watch from 2013 that houses an in-house movement which incorporates both a chronograph and traveler GMT functionality. Today, I can only think of the Tag Heuer 02 Chrono GMT, and based on styling I’d choose the Omega Chronograph 150M.
Now, if we assume the same discount and apply an inflation factor of about 20% from 2013 to 2022, this Omega would start at roughly USD9,300 today. That’s a lot of money, to be sure, but consider that you can find these watches online all day for around USD4,500-5,500 in the steel watch and bracelet configuration, probably less if you look around and go for the leather strap (I believe these have been discontinued, so to be clear you would have to go grey-market or second-hand to purchase this model).
This is an exceedingly crowded price bracket for watches in 2022, but what else is out there that competes with everything the Omega Chronograph 150M offers?
I did not intend to write over 5,000 words about what many might consider a watch that is at best inconsequential and at worst undesirable.
The fact that I ended up here and had fun doing so reminds me of why I still love watches in an era of 7-figure 5711s, and reinforces my conviction that if we scratch the surface of our Instagram feeds, there are so many more treasures out there for us all to obsess over.