On the Wrist, from off the Cuff: Monta Triumph vs. Oak & Oscar Olmsted, Luxury vs. Premium @ $1500
![Average Bros [Mark Alamares]](http://yt3.ggpht.com/AMTyfBoS_HGUS5NeMIdml3FQHYPLCvE10yYPfvjGSZRfNEkgmgSJlVqPFEQ4yky_fTnRrnqQ=s48-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ส.ค. 2024
- On this episode we compare two excellent modern everyday field-inspired watches in the $1500 range. Interestingly enough, they're about as different as they are the same. Although they're both inspired by the same genre, they both take two totally different approaches at the formula... and yet they both somehow manage to have come out great. While the Monta set its sights on targeting high-end benchmarks like the Rolex Explorer, offering a similarly luxurious experience for less, the Oak & Oscar targeted more stripped down benchmarks like the Hamilton Khaki Field, opting to produce a more premium take on an affordable field icon. With that said, even at a branding level these two endup on different sides of the same coin yet a again, with Monta being much more traditional take on a Horology focused brand, while Oak & Oscar very clearly exudes a more Lifestyle based vibe. After experiencing them both in the metal, I can honestly tell you that in this price point for an everyday capable general use sports watch, these are pretty much my top two picks. Sure there are other watches more specialized for less (and more for that matter), but when it comes to that balanced overall package, these two timepieces could teach the mainstream brands a thing or two about producing an ulta desirable wristwatch for today's market. Let me know what you think in the comments below, thanks guys!
montawatch.com/products/triumph
oakandoscar.com/pages/the-olm...
When I shot this comparison, I didn't imagine it would draw such a call to arms in defense for Oak & Oscar. I don't think they're any less of a brand than Monta, and I understand that under a different lens, many might find them preferable. Which is the point I was trying to make. My take on Oak & Oscar was meant to be massively complimentary. I mean some of the most successful watch brands are not targeting watch nerds, so when I say lifestyle, I mean bigger than just watches. A brand that you don't need a particular appreciation for horology to enjoy, if you enjoy premium goods in general, you can understand the value proposition of the Olmsted vs. The Monta business model which honestly does hinge more on the context of luxury brands and their implied value both overtly and not.
To be clear, I don't consider Premium to be lower than Luxury, they're just different approaches to a delivering a high end product. While Monta nails adding value to the traditional luxury watch formula, Oak & Oscar wasn't bound by it and were free to innovate and add value in totally different ways, going against the typical industry benchmarks.
I think your review is spot-on. I find the finishing of the O&O to be a touch less luxurious than the Monta. But, I think it is more of a lifestyle piece. I can imagine wearing it to go out for the day - catch a ball game. I see the Triumph as a hair more upscale in dress and wear. That's less about the quality and more about the attitude that they both exude. The O&O seems more relaxed. I really like them both, but would wear them for different reasons.
Owner of a white dialed Olmsted and the Sinn 556i here.
I think you brought the Sinn is as a value comparison, which is fair. I was drawn to both watches for such "clean" design cues and execution. Nothing frivolous, nothing wasted. Feels like quality in hand and on the wrist. I think Chase has done a great job developing a design language for his brand and it carries through whether he and his team are making a chrono, a GMT or a field watch. They manage to pull this off without making everything look the same (a la Audi).
I know Monta is well regarded, but none of their designs have ever done it for me. I don't have anything negative to say about them, just not my style. I've heard nothing but great things in terms of the quality of their watches but the designs always seemed a little too busy for me. The Triumph here is probably the one I find most appealing and is the most "simple" watch they offer.
Again, I think this speaks to my personal preferences more than anything.
Good review. Your camera work and lighting are always on point.
Now I want them both, plus the Sinn.
This is not good for my wallet.
Recently sold my Monta Triumph... was a great piece... just keep flipping watches so I can try new pieces... now have targeted the White dial Oak and Oscar for my next pickup.. great review! Thanks!
Been wearing that exact Monta on my wrist for about 2 years now and it's so nice in person. By far the most luxurious feeling and looking watch I currently own, aside from my other Monta 😂
Tyler have you checked out the new Monta Noble?
Great comparison review. Well thought out and executed. Both brands have their strong suits for sure and I would be proud to own either. I will have to give a slight edge to Monta though. For full disclosure I have reviewed the Triumph & Ocean King and even named the Triumph my "Watch Of The Year for 2018" and have yet to review an Oak & Oscar(working on it). I think the Monta wins on two fronts...Swiss manufacture & packaging. $1700-2000 is A LOT of money to part with for anything and with Monta I feel that the owner would feel that they're truly wearing a luxury product. Even though those beautiful Monta watch boxes are actually acrylic and not wood they sure are gorgeous! Chase from Oak & Oscar is nipping at Monta's heels so Justin from Monta better watch his six!
how do you think the traska summiteer holds up? can it punch above its weight and or is it just outside on a tier below. speaking on everything outside of the movement which is obvious diffei
I love the Traska Summiteer and think at the price point it offers much of the same experience, not quite in the same league but for understandably so.
First I’d like to say great video quality. I certainly can’t argue with you that these are both great brands, myself owning a few of Oak & Oscars watches. I have never had the luxury of trying on or handing a Monta, but they do have some great designs. For you to say Monta is a true enthusiast brand where O&O is not and is more a lifestyle brand seems a little contradictory to me. Lifestyle Brands/Products are typically depict something purchased for under $200 dollars and will be left in your drawer when the next season rolls around. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion and also to have their own tastes. The watch industry needs that and that’s how brands and community evolves. To me though everything that Chase, John, and the O&O team does screams enthusiast, while also holding true to their values, attention to detail and everything the brand stands for. You see this consistency through everything they do. You’re more biased towards Monta and I’m more biased towards Oak & Oscar, maybe that will change once you pick up your white Olmsted and truly experience what O&O is beyond the watch. Until then we can each hold our opinions and box or no box these are both great watches. Although I love that I can carry my watch wallet with extra straps and tools everywhere I go!
When I shot this comparison, I didn't imagine it would draw such a call to arms in defense for Oak & Oscar. I don't think they're any less of a brand than Monta, and I understand that under a different lens, many might find them preferable. Which is the point I was trying to make. My take on Oak & Oscar was meant to be massively complimentary. I mean some of the most successful watch brands are not targeting watch nerds, so when I say lifestyle, I mean bigger than just watches. A brand that you don't need a particular appreciation for horology to enjoy, if you enjoy premium goods in general, you can understand the value proposition of the Olmsted vs. The Monta business model which honestly does hinge more on the context of luxury brands and their implied value both overtly and not.
Average Bros I guess he’s got some loyal owners lol. I can see what you’re saying I guess it just wasn’t as evident in the video and again both great watches and good viewpoints!
@@scwaudby1 yeah, it seems I ruffled a few feathers by not stating the obvious fact that watch nerds already should know what make O&O a compelling brand and it's a bonus that they have crossover appeal, that someone who doesn't have an inert appreciation for horology but understands and appreciates high quality gear in general, whether it's paying a premium for craft food and drinks or for brand loyalty to your favorite electronic or automotive brands, there's a demographic of buyers to which O&O have some crossover appeal, it's not to say that their owners aren't by default non enthusiasts.
If you were to pick between the 556A and the Triumph, which one would you go for??
I came into this video thinking the Monta was the hands down winner. Until i saw them on your wrists. Boy, that Olmsted is way more impressive worn, then it is in hand or on a desk. It seems to really hug the wrist and have ideal dimensions. Will definitely be looking at it seriously. Make no mistake though, that Monta is a beauty. Thanks for the great vid!
Now that all Montas come with the adjustable clasp (previously only available on the Oceanking), I think the Triumph gets the edge. But that sandwich dial on the Olmsted is hard to pass by. Great video, thanks.
Nicely done. I was not familiar with Oak and Oscar. I like it. Nice job channelling Michael Scott. Lol
Thanks Tennessee Mike! Happy to help you learn more when you're ready.
That Monta looks pretty nice.
It’s clear after watching this video that the Sinn you showed in the video comes in last place when comparing all three
for how does the lume of the Oak and Oscar hold up ?
Im sold on Monta as my next watch. The problem is, as with other US microbrands, not being able to buy it EU. I would even consider buying a used one, but cant find any o the EU sites/ebay. Its really a shame. I know you can buy it from their site, but with a 30% tax for import it comes close to a price of a used tudor blackbay 36
Your enthusiasm is infectious. You are a great OG reviewer. I’m getting an O/O but that’s for style/personal preference. Monta looks like it definitely punches above its weight class. Just a comment: you repeat yourself occasionally. I think if you scripted the review you could give your words more weight and shorten the vids.
Thanks and yeah, the off the cuff vibe is part of the format. I have started a more concise segment series as well but it's still unscripted. Not sure if I'll ever venture in the territory of formal voice overs on top of b roll, a lot of excellent channels already doing that really well but who knows what the future holds.
@@AverageBros definitely meant no offense and your channel is a constant go-to for me for your perspective.
@@michaelsigman8942 no worries, appreciate the feedback and engagement either way Sir!
Bro, I hope you disinfected that O&O before you gave it back to the owner lmao!! Great comparison.
Monta for the win
Monta is perfect
Has anyone drunk the MONTA Kool-Aid ? I personally can't get past that 2K price point? Here's a list of some IMHO better choices. ALL PRICES AS OF TODAY ON JOMASHOP!
1: Breitling Colt $1995
2: Ball Hydrocarbon $1595
3: Longines Heritage L28824569 $ 1795
4:Oris Big Crown GMT $1820
5: ETERNA KONTIKI 44 $ 1800
6: Oris Aquis $1549
7: Hamilton X Wind $ 1075
8: Glycine Airman Bronze GMT $ 699
9: Tag Heuer Aquaracer $ 1925
10: Bell & Ross BR0392 $2075
Comparing directly from brand pricing with grey market pricing isn't really a one to one. You'd be better served to look and compare MSRPs.
So these two pieces operate much like Christopher Ward does. I am actually looking at getting the Humboldt gmt.
Thank you a lot. I wish to myself to be as well situated as you are to afford not only calvin klein with eta 2824-2.😂😂😂 All the best to you and stay safe.
Nice to see these brands get some love! Although I'm not sure the luxury vs premium dichotomy is the right way to look at these two. Seems like because the O&O didn't come in a wooden box it is deemed less luxurious? I've literally never used a watch box but use my O&O watch wallet all the time so I guess it depends on what you value. The bracelet in my Olmsted is just as nice and comfortable as my Omega which is a "luxury" brand. I think this is still a good review and you do say they're both great but for me O&O nails all the details (sandwich dial, bracelet, font, experience, etc.). Both represent a good value but just my two cents.
To be clear, I don't consider Premium to be lower than Luxury, they're just different approaches to a delivering a high end product. While Monta nails adding value to the traditional luxury watch formula, Oak & Oscar wasn't bound by it and were free to innovate and add value in totally different ways, going against the typical industry benchmarks.
I agree about the somewhat vague distinction between luxury and premium but I get why Mark did it this way - he's producing a video that contrasts aesthetics and design philosophies. Differentiators are necessary to create compelling content, even if they're somewhat arbitrary. That being said, the giant wood box you get with the Monta seems like a complete waste of space and effort. I'd rather they put that money towards redesigning their clasps or other in-watch improvements. As for O&O, I own the Jackson Chronograph and the Horween leather watch wallet it came with in lieu of a box is absolutely fantastic. It's far and away the best packaging of any watch I've seen regardless of price - it conveys both luxury and utility while the giant box that comes with an Omega Moon Watch, for example, does little more than offer maybe 90-seconds of "wow" before you chuck it into the back of your closet. I was at a Redbar event a few months back where people with VCs, JLCs and BLNRs couldn't get over the O&O packaging and were really impressed by the movement, too - that one has a handwound Eterna chrono movement with a 60-hour power reserve, a column wheel with vertical clutch and a stacked 3 o'clock register that tracks both minutes AND hours. Try finding that on a watch that runs under $6k.
These are both great looking watches. However, I think you are selling the Sinn a little short. Tim at Watchbox Reviews makes a compelling case for the 556ib compared to the Rolex Perpetual Oyster. I think all three of these watches offer great "value for money" compared to the big boys; it really simply comes down to personal taste and preference.
Great review; I enjoyed the comparison. But - correct me if I'm wrong. The ETA 2824-2 Top Grade (in the Sinn) would be a better (and maybe more accurate) movement than an SW300 or an ETA 2892-A2.
The 2892/SW300 is generally considered a higher caliber than their 2824/SW200 counterparts, think of it as having a fully loaded Toyota vs. a standard Lexus.
@@AverageBros I agree; but we are talking about a Top-grade ETA 2824-2 in the Sinn.
@@bellbrass yes, top grade of a lesser movement is still a lesser movement. It's not bad by any means but by comparison, not as good, especially when the 2892 or SW300 is regulated.
@@bellbrass also take into consideration what models Sinn put the 2892/SW300 in and how much further upstream those models are, it tells you what regard Sinn them selves value each movement.
@@AverageBros Ahh, I disagree, respectfully. I think a Top-grade 2824-2 is a better movement than an SW300 or an ETA 2892, unless those movements are further upgraded.
I think Monta have stopped giving the Natos
To my eyes the video shows the brushing is finer and better done on the Oak & Oscar. I think it really shows in on the bracelet.
I know that the Sellita is a clone of the ETA but there is a "perceived" difference in desirability. I believe that, had Monta chosen an ETA movement, they would be better positioned to compete in their price point.
I don't see how you can credibly argue that either brand has any more "enthusiast" credibility than the other; in that category they're equal. But in terms of appearance, the O&O looks like a watch where someone really obsessed over very small details. For example, study the transition from the edge of the dial to the chapter ring, the color matched date window, the curved and drilled lugs, the subtle pops of orange, and the consistency of the brushed finish all around, it's clear that there was a lot of trial-and-error and pain to get this right. The Monta, on the other hand, is also a very solid watch but the date window wasn't as well executed, the finishing isn't nearly as consistent, and the dial is somewhat derivative of the new 40mm Omega Railmaster.
More misinterpretations of this video... SMH. It's cool that you like the Olmsted but dissing the Triumph doesn't make make it any better. I like them both but honestly the feedback from O&O fans is a bit off putting to me as a consumer at this point. I mean the Sinn 556 fans took being compared to a $600 Seiko Alpinist better than these guys being compared to a literally spot on contemporary, that's been super well received by the community.
Average Bros Misinterpretations?! Please, stand behind your videos or get off YT. Multiple people have interpreted your video the exact same way as me, so maybe it’s you, and not them? At 10:15 you refer to Monta as the true enthusiast brand that separates it from O&O, and I mean geez, you even called O&O a "lifestyle" brand at around 10:50, and at 11:17, for people "who aren't really into watches," "don't even know what a Swiss movement is," and "they just know I want a good piece of kit," and then you compare an O&O purchase to buying an expensive pen or knife. When you characterize a watch brand as a "lifestyle" brand, you place it in the same camp as Daniel Wellington and Michael Kors, so you shouldn’t be surprised at all when viewers legitimately call you out on it. No one who is "just looking for a good piece of kit" is going to spend $1,500 on a completely unknown microbrand, either Monta or O&O. As a viewer on YT, it's off-putting when channels attack their own subscribers, and try to generalize legitimate criticism as fanboys of a particular brand. My comments came from an objective viewing of your video, and my takeaway from your video was apparently the same as many others, who likewise called you out on your b.s.. But I personally do not own either brand (yet), so I am not a biased fanboy of either. But I am a fan of watch videos by thoughtful people, and your bizarre and name-calling responses to valid criticism by viewers demonstrates, that apparently doesn’t include you. Even Archieluxury doesn’t name call his subscribers for their (at times savage) commentary about his videos.
Monta is on my radar for sure. I find the O&O interesting but don’t like the name.
Monta makes a great watch for sure - I'm sure you'll love it once you pick one up. I'm happy to tell you more about where our name came from. I quit the corporate day job to do something that I love and wanted our name to reflect two very important things to me. Oak, refers to my love of bourbon which is aged in oak barrels. Oscar, is my dogs name and part of our profits go to a local dog shelter. Thanks for watching Mark's video!
Oak & Oscar No disrespect meant. In this wide world of watches, every little detail counts. And the name and logo appeal are important too. I’d still like to check out your watch in the metal some day.
Anyway, I had listened to the Tenn and Two podcast interview with you. I loved your story. That’s when I first heard about your brand. Keep doing what you’re doing!
While you certainly have good perspective and a great production value, it was hard to take this as an objective narrative once you showed clear bias towards the Monta (not that it doesn't deserve all the praise it is getting). O&O is certainly ran by enthusiasts and they pour their heart and soul into everything they put out down to the packaging or lack thereof.
Okay wow, seriously... I don't know why people feel such an urge to try and defend O&O from me complimenting them on improving on classic designs and delivering a premium product, not bound by ideals that fall on many deaf ears in today's market. How is that an insult to their brand? Seriously, people are chiming in talking about how much packaging doesn't matter and then praising O&O for their packaging. Let's not turn the narrative into an online pissing contest. Like a said in the video, the description, and throughout the comments, these are both great watches from great brands, that deserve attention and appreciation for what they do differently from eachother and anyone else.
@@AverageBros Yeah I think you just weren't this obvious about in the video. But I appreciate the reply.
None of oak and oscar's designs do it for me, dare I say I personally find it pretty ugly, i'm sure the quality is there though. I have the Triumph in blue and love it
Hi Jean! And that's totally ok, a little harsh, but ok. Frankly, it's something that I love and appreciate about design: the same watch that folks call ugly other folks call amazing. Thats a good thing. We'd never want to design a watch that everyone loved. It'd be boring.
@@oakandoscar Wow, didn't know you guys were this active in the community, now i feel bad. I just wanted to emphasize this is a total subjective opinion as you already know. I've come across several praises of your watches on WUS so besides the design of the actual dial, everything on your watches seems to be on point.
I don't see how O&O is any less of an enthusiast brand than Monta. In fact, I'd argue they're more of one. They innovate in design and have developed a uniquely American, Midwestern aesthetic. Monta just tries to ape the Swiss in looks. The results are conservative bordering on stodgy. O&O offer up packaging that's both useful and luxurious while Monta plays to the bourgeoisie with "fancy" wooden boxes that offer zero utility. Don't get me wrong, Monta is impressive in build and value but I find O&O to be much more of a true watch nerd brand. Monta, on the other hand, seems to market to people who pine for a Rolex for the sake of prestige but can't quite afford one.
Nick S I don’t understand the need to put down Monta owners in order to prop up Oak and Oscar? Both brands can co-exist, even within the same collection. I’m no less of a “watch nerd” than you are and the Monta guys are true enthusiasts just like O&O are. Someone who wants prestige can find that at any price range so saying that Monta is for people that want a Rolex, but can’t afford one is completely off base. Lots of Monta owners, myself included, own or have owned Rolex. I understand you’re passionate about O&O, but you can do that without bashing others preferences.
Tre it’s not a need. It’s an opinion, which is my own. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve considered Monta in the past but the overall conservative “Swiss” look of their designs and the ancillary materials such as the aforementioned grossly oversized, overdone box lead me to draw these specific inclusions. They’re playing it safe in a risky segment - a microbrand watch that costs over $1k. I can’t necessarily blame them for that. It just isn’t for me.
Nick S I completely understand that. It would be strange if we all liked the same watches. It was the bashing of the owners and people who have purchased Monta’s that I was responding to more than anything. Monta and O&O owners have both spent thousands on these niche, boutique brands and I think they can both be celebrated without putting the other down.
@@tfacison when the COVID-19 crisis is over, perhaps you should set up a nationwide road-trip and give each one a hug. ;)
Stay safe!
Nick S Only if you ride shotgun! You stay safe as well man
I'm sorry but I wouldn't spend a penny on either.