If there's one watch that's really set my heart racing recently, it's the new Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra. Launched earlier this year, it's quality and looks are simply stunning, and in terms of value for money...well, I'll come back to that later.
Firstly a bit of eye candy for you all:
The Aqua Terra, in its basic format, comes in steel, steel and 18Ct Gold, and full 18Ct Gold. You have a choice of two dials in the steel model, either silver or dark grey with a tapestry-esque texturing, triangular luminous markers and arabics around the edge of the dial. There's a modern looking date aperture at 3 o'clock, and overall, the design concept is clearly modern with a definite 1950s' influence. Like any good watch, the dial is simple and uncluttered, the hands easy to read, and has a unique look that can't exactly be found on any other significant watch on the market at this time. The bracelet is solid and feels comfortable, and the clasp is a standard Omega double folding affair - not the best clasp I've seen on a watch, but it gets the job done. Inside the mid and full sized models is the truly brilliant cal. 8500.
This is quite simply the best finished movement I've ever seen on a watch at this end of the market, and is truly a piece of art. It really is a centrepiece, and is shown off beautifully through the Sapphire display back.
The technical details:
60 hour power reserve
Omega's free sprung balance
Fully made in-house
In other words, a really nice piece of kit.
Taking the mid-sized 38.5mm steel model for our baseline, the big competition comes from the Rolex Datejust 116200. In terms of looks, they are incredibly similar - the cases aren't all that different, the bracelet links are virtually the same, they're around the same size, and they both have chronometer rated self-winding movements. Whilst I'd argue that the Rolex's polished centre links make it look more dressy, I honestly think that the cal. 8500 has the potential to be better than the Datejust's cal. 3135. The cal. 8500 has been designed from the ground up (unlike past attempts to integrate the Co-Axial escapement into their range), so the reliability problems that plagued the previous Aqua Terra should have been solved. I think aesthetically it's a big selling point - it's proudly on show for the world to see, and Omega have every right to show it off. Rolex's movements have never been pretty, with them preferring to concentrate on function over form, so I doubt a factory option of a crystal caseback will be coming to the Oyster range any time soon.
Rolex once again has the edge when it comes to versatility: whilst Omega offers three different sizes (lady's, mid size, full size)in the different metal combinations, so does Rolex, with the added versatility of a huge range of dials, different bezels and different bracelets. This ability to customise your watch has always been the real appeal of the Datejust, and was one of the reasons why I chose mine. With Omega, you get the choice of a light dial, or a dark dial, take it or leave it.
However, the steel Aqua Terra is priced at a very reasonable £2600, whilst the Rolex weighs in at £3300 for its basic 116200 model. £700 is a big, big difference at this level of the market, and I'd reckon that the Omega will have a better scope for discount as well.
The new Aqua Terra is certainly an excellent choice for someone who wants a simple and practical luxury watch that looks great, and is still good value for money. Whilst it may lack the range of individuality a Datejust can provide, it still is a massive step forward for Omega in their desire to return to greatness. This closes the gap closer still between the two rivals, that cal. 8500 is something that should have Rolex quaking in their boots.
My recommendation: the mid-size steel model /w black dial, reference 18.104.22.168.06.001
Thanks for reading
The GMT Master