Rolex Submariner 116610LN vs 2018 Omega Seamaster Diver 300M 210.30.42.20.01.001; it’s the ultimate dive watch comparison! The ageless Rolex Submariner goes head to head with the renewed 25th anniversary Omega Seamaster Professional Diver 300M. Both of these luxury dive watches are stainless steel, automatic chronometers, feature diving clasps, and boast 300-meter water resistance. Omega vs Rolex starts now!

The Rolex Submariner 116610LN launched at Baselworld 2010. Although it measures the same 40mm as the prior reference 16610, the current Submariner is a larger and more imposing watch in all other dimensions; it wears more like a 42mm sports watch. Rolex 904L stainless steel is used to craft both the Oyster case and the Oyster bracelet.
A unidirectional dive bezel with a Rolex Cerachrom insert resists scratches and times your dive. Rolex includes an Oysterclasp with Glidelock adjustment for use over a diving suit or simply to facilitate more convenient sizing of the watch Rolex Chromalight luminant is applied to the hands and indices of the dial for easier reading at night. A screw-down Triplock crown helps to keep the ocean’s fury at bay during dives.
Inside the case, Rolex fits a manufacture caliber 3135 automatic chronometer movement. This precision movement is certified as a Swiss chronometer by the COSC before being cased and re-tested by Rolex to achieve “Superlative Chronometer” status; precision of -2/+2 seconds per day – or better – is promised. The Rolex 3135 features a 48-hour power reserve, quickset date, and hacking seconds (stop seconds).
The 2018 Omega Seamaster Diver 300M (210.30.42.20.01.001) was among the starts of Baselworld 2018. Its previous 41mm size has grown to 42mm, but this luxury dive watch remains instantly recognizable as the descendant of the 1993 model and the 1995 Omega SMP that starred on the wrist of Pierce Brosnan as James Bond in “Goldeneye.” With a tapered crown guard, a new helium release valve that can be opened while submerged, and a diving bezel with ceramic insert, the Omega matches and even surpasses the features of the Rolex Submariner.
Each 2018 Omega Seamaster Professional Diver 300M includes an upgraded stainless steel bracelet with a diving clasp. The deployant clasp is released by integral triggers, and it contains two adjustment systems for sizing and diving. Its first trick is the well-known fold-out dive extension; a new push-button incremental slider permits an additional 9.6mm of adjustment for both diving and sizing the watch for different wrists.
Omega’s caliber 8800 Master Chronometer co-axial caliber is an automatic movement with 55-hour power reserve. The movement meets the COSC chronometer standards for a bare movement, but it meets an additional battery of (METAS) tests that apply to the fully assembled watch.
An Omega Si14 silicon hairspring yields antimagnetic resistance, and the caliber 8800 sports hacking seconds with a quickset date. For the first time on a series-production three-hand Omega SMP Diver 300M, the Omega has chosen to fit a sapphire display case back.
The Omega Seamaster Diver 300M is encased in 42mm of steel surrounding a black dial on a stainless steel bracelet. Functions include hours, minutes, seconds, date, and helium escape valve. The watch also measures 13.7mm in thickness and 50.1mm from lug-to-lug.
The Rolex Submariner features a 40mm stainless steel case surrounding a black dial on a stainless steel Oyster bracelet with folding buckle. Functions include hours, minutes, seconds and date. The watch also measures 12.6mm in thickness and 48mm from lug-to-lug.

It's a championship match! You asked, I answered. Omega Seamaster Diver 300M refreshed for 2018 versus the Rolex Oyster Perpetual Submariner, having dispatched the Tudor Black Bay S&G with extreme prejudice. You requested to see the Omega Seamaster Diver 300 in a championship bout. Well, the king wears the belt until dethroned. Is it going to happen? I don't know. But let's start with the challenger's pitch.

First and foremost, this watch is 25 years young, the longest lived of the Omega Seamaster Professional designs. The Omega Seamaster Divers date back to 1957. They've had nothing like the design continuity of the Rolex Submariner—that changed with this design in 1993. Refreshed for 2018, the watch is now a 42 rather than a 41, with a bevy of new features and refinements. On my 16 centimeter circumference wrist, you can see the Omega Seamaster 300m is 13.7mm thick, 42mm in diameter rather than 41, and as you'll note, 50mm lug-to-lug. But thanks to the pivoted end link of the bracelet, it doesn't actually project beyond the lugs. So Omega Seamaster 300m lug-to-lug, is the dimension of the watch on the bracelet and the strap equally. It wears true to size. The spacing between the lugs is 20mm. And unlike a Sub, you do have factory strap options. So that sizing is actually relevant—more than just Accademia.

You can see that the bracelet is handsome, always a little bit of a hybrid of a dress bracelet and a sports bracelet. It’s a combination of staggered sizes, staggered alignment, polished and set and finished facets. But it's more squared off on its shoulders than past Bond Seamaster bracelets. All removable links, including half links—and you can see the watch does have them—are fixed by screws. The clasp has always been an imposing piece on the Diver 300M and you can see that as ever handsomely finished machined from the solid with solid swing arms. But inside? Upgrades. All or nothing Dive extension has always been a signature of this model. But now you have a push button slider with 9.6mm of tool-free incremental adjustment. So it's not just an extension for a dive suit or a thick coat anymore. It's actually useful for precise sizing if you give this watch as a gift or need to fine tune as his wrist size changes with heat and activity.

The helium escape valve returns, but it's been reprofiled and it's been redesigned. It looks a little bit like a silver Reese's peanut butter cup now, and you can open it underwater with no hazard to the watch. So if you're mid-dive and you think you might need that helium escape capability, you can actually open this helium escape valve now with no additional hazard to the watch. So there's no penalty, no danger to the timepiece revision of a signature element. Academic, perhaps, but it's a feature nonetheless. The bezel has always been very shallow in its nerling, and this is one of the traditional handicaps of the model. They have reduced the amount of force necessary to move the bezel, so that's a good thing, but you still can't really get a purchase on it with wet, sweaty, or gloved hand. Line up that luminescent bezzle pearl with the skeleton signature hand of this model and you actually have a cool 0 to 60 minute timer. While the detent may be somewhat ropey and the nerling is rather shallow, nevertheless, the material quality is unarguable as there is a ceramic insert, effectively a scratch-resistant to sapphire with actual cold enamel fillets—it’s no longer a white lacquer, it's quite hard.

You'll also note that the dial has in some ways been revived. The classic Omega Seamaster Diver 300 Wave, on hiatus from 2012 to 2017 back and forth. It's a throwback to the Pierce Brosnan era, but now it's executed on ceramic and laser cut into the ceramic dial. Ceramic using a lot of the advantages, the timeless and ageless tarnish-free, corrosion-resistant qualities of enamel without the fragility and expensive enamel. You can now see it's made of zirconium oxide signed right under the cannon pin.

A new date relocated from 3 o'clock, minimalist in comparison to the Cyclops eye of the Rolex. There's a design philosophy difference, but it is unobtrusive. If that's how you like your dates, this is your watch. All applied indices are high quality and a few splashes of red to make the dial pop. Turn it over and you can see that the sheer guards for the crown are extreme. There's probably more protection here than on the Rolex, but you will struggle to grip the smaller and more heavily shielded and bolstered crown.

Turn it all over and this is an important decision point compared to the Rolex. Not just a display case back, so you can see that for what you've paid, but a high tech master coaxial caliber 8800. Let's break that down. It meets all the COSC- chronometer standards, but it also meets the META’s chronometer standard developed between Omega and the Swiss Federal Institute of Metrology. Now, it's a fully cased up test in 6 positions, not the bear movement 5 position test to the chronometer. It's also a test of the watches winding efficiency, power reserve, water-resistance, and anti-magnetism. Silicon hairsprings—this watch effectively a-magnetic, not anti-magnetic. Full balance bridge with a free sprung index like the Rolex, so it's tough, and it has the tri level coaxial. So it has the exotic George Daniels escapement that contributes to timing, stability, as well as improved long-term precision and reduced maintenance requirements. Fifty-five hour power reserve, hacking seconds, and a quickset date, and a quirky 25,200 vibration per hour beat rate, and 300 meters water-resistant.

Let's bring on the Champ. Launched in 1953, and this 2010 to present 116610 would be recognizable to an owner of an early Rolex Submariner 6200. So it has matchless design continuity and icon qualities that even the 25 year Seamaster Diver does not have. Now, I'm going to put this watch on the wrist and you're going to see that it does wear slimmer. Before I throw it on, I want to give you a quick profile shot. That's the Rolex. That's the Omega. You can see visibly, the Rolex is a slimmer watch. The Omega is just a bit girthier, you’re 1.1mm thicker and it does show on the wrist. If you're going to wear your dive watch with the tux, Bond-style, this is the one to wear as it’s simply slimmer, more elegant, and a better match with a somewhat less boisterous style design.

The watch is 12.6mm thick, 40mm in diameter, lug-to-lug a 48.1, and then if you include the solid end links, it splays out 51.1mm across the wrist. 20mm lugs spacing more academic than on the Omega because there are no factory strap options. The Oyster is understated. You compare this to the Seamaster bracelet and you can see one of them is a little bit of a dress-sports bracelet hybrid, whereas the Oyster is a hard core sports piece—understated, handsome, solid, and well-built with big gaps on the underside to vent the wrist and avoid pinching skin or pulling hair. The clasp or redoubtable piece blasted and polished internally. You can see it's actually blessed with two locks. One is a horn beak system, so you actually can't open it just by pulling it. You need to pull the tab that unlocks the beak. You close it and you've got double locks with a flush fitting clamshell that’s seamless once in its locked position. Now, go inside and you'll note that there is a 20mm adjustment system in 2mm increments, so it doesn't have the absolute extension scope of the Omega, but you do get incremental adjustment throughout the full 20 mm. It's not 9.6mm and then all or nothing. Nevertheless, it doesn't quite pack the feature content of the Omega.

Now jump into the bezel. I can give you a quick shout out for bezel sharpness and nerling depth because this is one is just a pleasure to use. You hear it and you can rewind back to the Omega. It feels better. It sounds better. The tent is crisper and the nerling is deep and sharp, so if my hands were all sorts of slimy, I could still turn this bezzle. The bezel quality is high with a platinum inlay and somewhat relieved numerals, so it's a little bit of a different philosophy than the Omega which has inlay of cold enamel. Ceramic insert here, too, so they're both highly scratch-resistant. You'll appreciate the fact that there is quite a distinction in case design—the Rolex a little bit more conservative, the Omega a little bit more, shall we say, stylish, sharing this feature with a number of Omega Seamasters and Speedmasters over the years. And of course, the sharing with the GMT, the Sea-Dwellers, and the Explorer II—that supercase profile.

Inside, high-Grade, black lacquer dial, white gold appliqué, and if you want to be able to read your date, the Cyclops eye is matchless for clarity and magnification. Turn it all over and well, it's a screwed-in case back, so nothing to see here. 300 meters water resistant triple crown, the Rolex caliber is a tough COSC-chronometer, 48-hour power reserve, hacking seconds, quick set date, full balance bridge, it has an overcoil hairspring, so it's probably a better timekeeper in multiple positions than the Omega, although the Omega is tested in 6. So, they're very close and it's probably going to come down to the individual condition and interval since regulation and service between these two watches. I believe that in the real world, this watch is just as accurate as the coaxial. I'll also add the fact that this timepiece being all Rolex right down to the case and bracelet isn't a collaborative effort from a group of companies like the Omega. All of this is made by Rolex in-house, and that might be worth something to you.

Now, let's talk about what the Rolex brings to the table. Obviously timeless, iconic design. The Omega is now 25 years old. The Rolex has been essentially the icon of the dive segment, and, along with the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms, the pioneer of the modern dive watch design since 1953, this one has it all over the Omega in that regard. Superior value retention. Buy this watch, you're probably not going to lose anything, even if the economy takes a little bit of a downturn. New this is $8,550—pre-owned it sells for about $9,500 to $10,000, and I think we're going to see a big correction for the current hysteria within the Patek Philippe steel Nautilus and Aquanaut market. I actually think Rolex steel is going to hold its value over time. So, this is practically a tradable commodity. Also, slimmer and a better dressed companion—if you do wear formal attire with your diver and you're more of a desk diver, this is probably a better watch for you stylistically.

Superior bezzle. It feels better. It's easier to grip. It's functionally better. The tent is more satisfying, and overall, it feels like a more refined product. Also, real world accuracy might not exceed the Omega's, but in my experience, it's on par in spite of the lack of an exotic escapement. The Omega has tech interest, but not necessarily the edge and precision. I'll also add that because this does not feature the somewhat exotic coaxial escapement when tested to destruction, I would put my money on this one failing last between the two. Also, easier to read the date—if you like to read the date on your watch and that's a functional component for you, this is your only choice. Crown grip and understated, but wonderfully functional piece, you might never think of it until you have to actually grip it, it's bigger, it's more sharply nerled, it projects farther beyond its shoulders and it's altogether easier to access than the component on the Omega. So advantage Rolex in that critical functional regard. I’ll also add that glide lock doesn't give you as much absolute extension, but there is something to be said for having incremental tool free adjustment 2mm at a time over 20mm, rather than having to go all or nothing with a flip out once you're done with less than 10mm of increments in the Omega. So, I'm actually going to give glide lock the advantage for real world functionality here. I'm also going to mention the fact that this is the dream of innumerable generations. And in that sense, not only is it timeless, but it's a timeless idea. This is not just the best known dive watch. Rolex is the world's best known watch, and this is the best known Rolex.

Now, same warranty for the two—5 years each. So I'm not given any advantage in that regard. The Omega advantages: a more imposing wrist presence with a larger case. This is a watch that has far more tech interest. You can see the movement—can't do that in the Rolex—55 hours versus 48 hour power reserve, coaxial escapement, might not be good for an absolute accuracy advantage, but the anti-magnetism is a huge advantage over the Rolex. This thing can take an MRI hit, the Rolex cannot. And the coaxial is just cool. I'll also add that this watch, in terms of tech, gives you a dial that's more intriguing and more elaborate than the Rolex, and the integration of ceramic, as well as laser etching, simply inspires the imagination. The helium escape valve is unnecessary, but it's present all the same, and it's there if you need it. Once again, Omega with the tech edge. The clasp is simply more impressive from a technical standpoint, having both a fold-out extension and a push button slider. For some, this is going to be a preferable arrangement to the Rolex, and you add the half links to the bracelet. It might be a more versatile watch from a sizing standpoint. You might be able to find a better size more quickly with the Omega Seamaster 300m in terms of thickness and sizing. I'll also add that it's a better watch when it comes time to judge loom. The watch has slightly better lumen—you're going to see that. I’ll also mention that this watch has a stealthy date implementation. If you don't like the in-your-face Cyclops eye, this is going to be the date for you—you retain the function, but you don't necessarily have to look at it and think about it. Finally, monstrous value. This is a watch that sells new for $4,850—$3,500 to $4,000, on a bracelet, when pre-owned. So this watch has it all over the $8,550 new Rolex that sells for $9,500 to $10,000 when pre-owned. You can pick up one of these things for $4,000 used, and that's without talking about the Sub $5,000 new strap options which leaves me with my last point.

If you want a factory strap on your diver, you can easily accessorize with the Omega, whereas the Rolex doesn't give you that flexibility. Ultimately, I'm going to pick the Omega Seamaster 300 Diver for tech interest, for a style that appeals more to me personally, a case that's just a little bit more nuanced and detailed, that has more interesting facets, curves and in almost every respect, more hooks that captured the imagination than the Rolex is relatively plain composition. So, the Rolex is still a franchise player, perhaps no longer the MVP.

This year, the Crown and the belt, at least in my mind, goes to the Omega Seamaster Diver 300M. See them both and make your choice on the WatchBox. For tech, esthetics, values, features, bracelet, clasp, display case back, I'm giving it to the Omega. But here's another reason why I favor Omega's diver—the Sub is good, but with differential lume the minute hand and the bezel pearl, the Seamaster is just a bit more readable at night. And, if you look closely, you can see that both the applications of lume to the hands and to the indices are larger on the Omega than on the Rolex. Both good, the Omega is just better. Let me know your pick in the comments below.