# Breitling Superocean vs. Colt Automatic



## RTea

A smaller Breitling diver is on the horizon for me and I just wanted to see what everyone thinks regarding the Breitling Superocean and Breitling Colt Automatic (pictures of the models I'm referring to below).

The Colt looks dressier and more modern in my eyes but the Superocean is a classic and a tool watch. They are roughly the same in diameter but the SO is quite a bit thicker.

Which would you choose as a daily wearer and why?

(Images from Breitlingsource)


----------



## drickster

Superocean Proffessional...but that's what I'm wearing right now.

I like the numbers and more simple dial for every day wear.










It has a Kent Park re-lume that is awesome...










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## fastward

SO. I prefer The Arabic numerals.


----------



## fjcamry

SO also. I wear my Seawolf daily because it's toolish and has numbers. Even over my Steelfish because the steelfish only has a partial numeral at 12,6,9. So this just may be that's easier to read than the size difference.


----------



## RTea

Wow thanks guys, wasn't expected it to go 100% to the SO. For some reason the SO bezel looks more dated to me than the Colt bezel even though both of the pictured models were made around the same time. I think a 42mm Steelfish would be perfect and I should have jumped on it a few years ago but I was in the "bigger is better" phase and wouldn't look at anything under 43mm.

I have a SO expected to arrive today (super quick) and will definitely post some snaps up. I found a nice Colt for sale too and I might have to grab both... eep!


----------



## vintageguy

fastward said:


> SO. I prefer The Arabic numerals.


+1


----------



## heb

Hello,
Another reason for that specific SO is its iconic looks. The new replacement model that's been around for the last couple of years is rather sad.

Enjoy it.
heb


----------



## rony_espana

Well I owned a SO and kept banging it in doorways and walls (not sure how) because of the thickness. Never owned a Colt, but if it's thinner I think I'd personally go that way.


----------



## Toothbras

Both the bezels look the same to me, but I prefer the dial of the SO. Definitely easier to read and looks a little nicer.


----------



## JTumino

While the dial of my Steelfish is a bit busy and at times difficult to read, I concur with a previous poster about the new SuperOceans in that their bezels really turn me off to the "iconic" Breitling look. 

As far as it being too thick and banging it into things, I find the size and weight actually prevent this. Smaller, lighter watches seem to "hide" themselves from me and get banged into things. My Steelfish, and all large, thick watches for that matter, really make themselves known on a wrist. You feel the weight, and it doesn't disappear on you. You're always aware of it and conscious of if, and it doesn't get banged up.


----------



## OzO

Always been a Superocean fan, never so much the Colt. That's a great Superocean, I had one for a while before I bought my Steelfish (which I love love love!!!!)


----------



## al358

If it were me I would save a little more and go with the steelfish, best of luck with your descision!


----------



## wristclock

Of those two the SO for sure. I like the classic foolish look. Plus legibility is a big factor in my book. I am surprised about the responses about the steelfish being hard to read. The dial is busy but the markers are very defined. I actually like how readable the fish is. It is my most legible of all watches I own.


----------



## BC214

I have the SO. It is thick, but bulletproof. The steelfish is nice also, but the SO has it IMO. Beautiful dial on it.


----------



## mcquillian

I own the Breitling Colt model that you have pictured. It is an absolutely gorgeous watch, and is a classic. They are both great watches, however the SuperOcean should end up costing you more. You cannot go wrong with either one.


----------



## JTumino

I believe what makes the Steelfish hard for me to read at times is how small the dial is, in addition to its "sunburst" effect. 

Regardless, it's a great watch and I love it.


----------



## fjcamry

It could be the polished markers at 12,6,9. Unlike on the Superoceans with full Arabic numerals, this makes a more symmetric appearance on the dial for the Superoceans and for me, my seawolf.


----------



## JTumino

I agree, it's a bit unbalanced. That said, I'd rather it look the way it does than have all 12 numerals like a wall clock. Beautiful Arabic makers.


----------



## RTea

I love the Steelfish and owned it twice but 44mm is just too large for me to swing. I would like to find a 42mm Steelfish but they're so rare.


----------



## fjcamry

JTumino said:


> I agree, it's a bit unbalanced. That said, I'd rather it look the way it does than have all 12 numerals like a wall clock. Beautiful Arabic makers.


Yes, there's nothing I would do to change the Steelfish. I would never do anything to mine or say anything that would change that. It really is excellent the way it is. I just think that I wear my Seawolf more daily than anything. You should see the VP of Breitling Jean Paul on you tube at Basel world 2013. During his interview he wore the Emergency 2, and he looked very casual and comfortable even though he had a 51mm, $15k watch on his wrist. And he's not a huge guy, but more average.


----------



## Jrsnow

If I could only have one Superocean, it would most likely be the Steelfish. It has a bit more presence than the SO, but is easier for me to handle daily than the Seawolf. The SOH is great too but to me I put that in a different group than the ones discussed in this thread, not very toolish.


----------



## fjcamry

Jrsnow said:


> If I could only have one Superocean, it would most likely be the Steelfish. It has a bit more presence than the SO, but is easier for me to handle daily than the Seawolf. The SOH is great too but to me I put that in a different group than the ones discussed in this thread, not very toolish.


Switching from my Seawolf to my Steelfish at home. I agree , I'm really enjoying the good looks of the Steelfish, especially going from the wrist presence of the Seawolf. As an added bonus, the Steelfish is on the Professional 1 bracelet with the divers extension.

I know on the new Superoceans 44 and 42 you get the rubber bezels and colorful chapter rings. These new ones are meant for rubber bands.

Which leads me to a question about the Pro 2 bracelet. I know switching to a rubber band would be ideal for diving, but what if I like to wear the bracelet. Only the Pro 1 bracelet has the divers extension. And assuming I'm going to take certification classes for scuba diving, where does that leave me?


----------



## ROBERT A

I see this is an old thread, thought I'd weigh in since I have both pieces (or close to it); the SO and the Colt GMT (not the +). Although both pieces are similar in styling I think the Colt is a better choice for a daily wearer. It truly is a "do anything, go anywhere piece". The SO is more tool looking because the dial is stenciled and is larger at 42mm (Colt is 40mm for GMT, 41mm for non GMT). Also the SO is 15mm thick versus 13.5 for the Colt and it has more than adequate water rating. The Colt, by being a bit more dressier in styling makes it a more versatile piece. My SO seems out of place if I am wearing dress casual clothes, but the Colt fits right in. Just my nickel's worth of free advice....


----------



## Doc J

Personally i've never liked the font on the SO arabics, so I'd go the Colt


----------



## dougkn

Agree....on the list....maybe one day...


----------



## DennisJ

I'd go with the SO (I actually did). Finnish are on par between the two, but the arabic numerals and domed crystal on the SO cuts it for me...
But then again, the Colt is very classy???

Hard one


----------

