Have modern Omega dress watches been slept on for far too long?

Zach Blass

Engineering in watchmaking is meticulous and scientific, but the irony is the purchase of watches is often emotional and irrational. None of us need mechanical watches, yet the enthusiast community has never been more down bad with the sickness than now, and the base of those infected is only growing larger. We collectors can cite logic and systems for how we evaluate the watches we’re attracted to, and establish the boxes that must be ticked. And yet, we don’t always get it right. A recent Omega novelty within the Paris 2024 special collection has sent me spiraling down a rabbit hole, and leaving me with the question: why did we all celebrate the Rolex 1908 when we have long overlooked modern Omega dress watches like the De Ville Tresor? Let me take a step back, and get figuratively harnessed up so we can safely repel down my spiraling journey of realisation.

Perpetual 1908 debuts, and is met with raucous applause

Why the Rolex Perpetual 1908 was viewed as an exciting development upon its Watches and Wonders 2023 launch does not take a genius to figure out. For a stringent manufacture that mainly plays it safe within its tried-and-true Oyster Perpetual framework, an entirely new model with an exhibition caseback is understandably an exciting novelty. In the grand scheme of things, a dressy watch with an exhibition caseback is hardly novel, but within the context of Rolex, the 1908 did justify the term. At first, we were treated to white and yellow gold models with matte dials, and in 2024, a platinum model incited even more conversation with a its icy blue guilloché dial. Rolex and guilloché dials were definitely not present on my bingo card. Ultimately, the common sentiment around the 1908 has been that there’s a lot to like other than its enigmatic accessibility at retail.

The new Omega that lit the flame of comparison

Fast-forward to last week, when Omega debuted its latest Paris 2024 Specialties watch. Inspired by the CK 859 design from 1939, it featured a solid silver guilloché dial, and a commemorative Paris 2024 caseback. Though distinct in proposition, there are many parallels between it and the 1908. Both have applied numerals at the cardinal points, with the 6 o’clock numeral excluded due to a small seconds counter. Both are 39mm in diameter, with the Paris 2024 Bronze Gold Edition slightly larger 11.7mm thick and 46.2mm lug-to-lug, while the Rolex 1908 is 9.5mm thick and 45.2mm lug-to-lug. The 1908 may have the advantage of being thinner, but Omega’s bronze gold case nets a watch that is nearly half the price (US$12,000) of an 18k yellow gold 1908 (US$23,000), though it must be acknowledged that the former is a 9k gold alloy comprised of 50% copper, with some silver, gallium, and palladium in the mix. Don’t forget though, this Omega Paris 2024 Bronze Gold Edition does have a precious metal dial none of the 1908 configurations have.

Billed as a special edition rather than a limited edition, it’s unclear if and when the new Paris Bronze Gold could be discontinued. The reason I mention this is because Omega’s CK-inspired and vintage-styled watches have previously been limited in nature, without a standard-production staple. For example, Omega’s stainless steel Seamaster 1948 collection turned heads when it launched in 2018 as a continuation of its platinum-cased siblings for the collection’s 70th anniversary. I recall many lamenting they had missed out on the limited run of both steel models, myself saddened I was not in a position to purchase the sub-seconds model. Shortly after in 2019, however, Omega began to expand a dress watch line that remains in regular production – the De Ville Tresor.

The arguably overlooked Omega De Ville Tresor

Every time I look at our shots of the Omega De Ville Tresor, I wonder why I, and others, do not discuss it more. What the collection ultimately offers are examples like the above, a wrist-friendly 40mm stainless steel watch, 10.1mm thick, and 44.8mm lug-to-lug. Limiting the parameters to time-only or time-and-date, Omega’s website currently lists 12 configurations, with a mix of steel and precious metal cases and a variety of dial colours. Of all the available references, this blue linen-like dial is the one that has haunted me, a wonderful and dynamic execution.

While it is a dress watch collection, the De Ville Tresor still offers a robust Co-Axial movement that has a full balance bridge and is METAS certified. The movements, such as the 8910 above, are exhibited and well-decorated with Omega’s signature Geneva waves in arabesque. This particular stainless steel model currently retails for US$7,100, and its precious metal equivalent retails for US$19,200. Though the De Ville Tresor precedes the Rolex 1908 by four years, it has yet to have its time in the watch enthusiast spotlight. Is that not criminal? I say shame on us. This is not to say Omega hasn’t had success in the sale of this collection, but within our niche, I have yet to spot one on the wrist of a fellow RedBar NYC member, or see as much conversation on social media as I would like.

Omega could leave Rolex in the dust with complications

A quick but worthwhile tangent before I wrap up the tour of my inner watch-nerd inner, a big talking point ahead of Watches and Wonders 2024 was the idea that the 1908 is ripe for complication expansion. Rolex, however, has rarely dabbled in high complications in its recent history, hitting the ceiling with triple calendars and moonphases now erased from the catalogue. In fairness, Rolex has flexed its ingenuity with its Sky-Dweller bezel system and undoubtedly could create higher-complication watches with enough investment. But I suspect pigs will be flying the day we see a Rolex tourbillon. Omega, on the other hand, already has tourbillon watches.

Omega has even gone as far as to create its own distinct take on a chiming watch. The Speedmaster Chrono Chime’s calibre 1932 is the most complicated movement ever produced by the manufacture, a high-beat 5Hz movement that utilises a repeater mechanism to audibly convey the elapsed time of the chronograph. And this is not just a chronograph, it’s a split-seconds chronograph – a complication many watchmakers claim is harder to realise than a tourbillon. So, if we’re keeping score, it’s a high-beat, chiming, monopusher split-seconds chronograph.

Now, I’m not suggesting all of this functionality is brought to a De Ville Tresor, but with Omega and Swatch Group expertise, De Ville Tresor moonphases, triple calendars, or even perpetual calendars are absolutely feasible in my opinion. So, between Omega and the Crown, the former is far more likely to succeed and engage in the dress watch arms race.

Final thoughts

To be clear, both the Rolex 1908 and Omega’s modern dress watches are phenomenal – it’s not my intention to uplift Omega at the expense of Rolex. What I am sensing is a similar dynamic to what I explored when I questioned why Patek Philippe’s quartz-driven Aquanaut Travel Time did not face the usual expected wave of quartz snobbery. Is it one rule for Patek and another for the rest? In this scenario, it’s clear to me that the watch community needs to be shaken up a bit. We not only need to better recognise the strength of Omega’s modern dress watches, but also make enough noise to incentivise the brand to develop this less-in-focus segment even further. This could mean new evolutions of De Ville Tresor, more CK-inspired and vintage-styled models that are regular production, or perhaps an effort to embed classic complications into these lines. Rolex and Omega are both winners, we are simply the losers that could have given more props to Omega’s modern dress watch models like the De Ville Tresor.