that dead user doesnt know what the hell he is talkin about the timbomb is sleek and comfortable and will last you a bette part of ur life bein a automatic watch, the time tank is a beautiful piece of art, yes big but hey im a big guy and is just my size, as for attention my judge stelth black in all its weighty glory got my more attention then a rolec or any other watch would get me so that guy needs to give up, we are not brandwashed, we just like oakley hats why we are all on here for, OAKLEY, so thats what i got to say to that dude.

Haven't read this whole thread...could care less about newbie rants....but - I think Bong's advice is solid...Go for the TB first - friggin' love mine. Plus - I'm betting whichever one you get first - you'll end up getting the other eventually anyway - they are just that cool!

You truly can't lose with either one but the TB is getting tougher to get. I'm not even a watch guy but I have to have both...

Happy hunting!

Particularly when you can pick up a TB for $250 at a Vault.

it's like this...Someone here told me when I couldn't decide the watch to buy first, buy the one that will be the hardest to get in coming times...Timebomb is gone, so what is circulating is it. Tank hasn't even taken off yet, so when it hits full steam, they will be very easy to get. I was tossed for a while, but wound up buying 2 Timebombs recently instead, and at the vault prices of late, you would be nuts not to get one. Polished/Ion/Stealth finishes do scratch very easy, so if it is a daily watch, my personal experiences have led me to prefer the X Metal finish over the others. My X Metal White has no scratches at all and I wear it very regularly alternating with my Stealth Judge. Just my .02 cents...

oogie: Particularly when you can pick up a TB for $250 at a Vault.


Do WHAT now?

I thought they were stil $600ish..

nope they dropped like 3-4 weeks ago to 250 for stealths and like 300 for all others at vaults.

The $250 TB was mentioned to me as one of the deals when I was at the Vault yesterday. I'm already pretty set with my watches (and my wife would likely harm me in my sleep if I got another), so I didn't dig deep for colorway details.

Local Vault still have it in the 400 range here for a Carbon fiber TB.

Pls do dig the next time you're over there..? I fear the flood gates are about to open, when they do I hope eveyone plays nice.

can i put my 2 cents on this topic? Id pick the timebomb. TT looks too big for me :-(

Timebomb. Classic 'Science meets Art' look while sporting a mecha-quartz movement. Frankly, for the money, especially these days, the TB is a much better buy.

Let's go down the reasons.

First of all, the TT is still in production whilst the TB is out. That alone adds reason to get the TB over the Tank for supply.

Second, the Bomb is sleaker design. It's also slightly lighter if you go for the non-ion plated models. I know that aesthetics are subject to personal opinion, but I think many people here would agree that the Bomb is more representative of a good Oakley era that doesn't really see much debate over whether or not it was good, whereas today there are those (myself included) who decry modern Oakley beholden to stake and stock holders. The TT was a design driven by an attempt to fan demand rather than a design that blossomed. I look at it and feel myself cringe slightly.

The TB movement is based on a Seiko/ Citizen eubache. Very reliable. The only downside is that it's reserve battery is ludicrously useless. I have no before hand knowledge of the Tank's movement but then I'm not one to be sold on a "chronograph" looking watch that is driven by battery.

Four: Here I am about to traipse into territory that will make people hate me and love me. The Timebomb is a first while the Tank is just a dying gasp. I have no doubts that the Tank keeps excellent time. In fact, I've read reviews and heard opinions on timezone.com that place it as one of the best buys out there for a watch of its price in class. However, it does not say OAKLEY to me. To me, Oakley is about Mad Science. Mad Science is best captured with designs like Romeo, Juliet, Plate, OTT, TimeBomb, Zero 0.3, etc. The Tank looks like something that Diesel could have made, or even Fossil watches. If I wanted a Diesel, I could easily go out and buy one. I want an Oakley and the Timebomb, Torpedo, and Crush are the watches that most suitably represent the design philosophy I love so much.


Point number five. Just you wait, the Time Tank will fall in price. As much as many of us would hate to admit it, Oakley does NOT make watches known for their luxury pedigree. These are not IWC Schaffhausen watches, Patek Philippes or Vacheron Constantins. They're Oakleys. They're not purely mechanical. Plus, the Tank is marketed poorly. Additionally, what poor marketing is done is aimed at segment of the population that the fine luxury swiss watch industry largely snubs its nose at: posing twenty-somethings. It's a good watch, but the ads really don't show that. The Timebomb did. The Bomb offered an air of exclusivity.

I'm hoping that my opinion will be read constructively. These are by no means incendiary remarks so please don't take them that way.

I do not own either but if I had to choose I would go for the Time Tank, it just a great watch. Time Bomb is cool too, you have a hard choice.

If anyone happens by a vault and see's a stealth timebomb for the $25.00 please pm me. Id love to pick one up.

Ditto for me pls. Anybody who lives state-side, now's the time to get some good karma :)

very insightful Jon. you're right about Oakley's marketing, that it's geared towards a more youthful culture but then again that's their bread and butter, as a result their watches will not seem as a high end luxury watch item. regarding the Time Bomb's marketing, yes it offered an air of exclusivity (remember the launch at Tourneau) but was still scoffed at.

also, designwise i think the Time Bomb and the Time Tank are so different in aesthetics it really isn't fair to compare the two, a lot of it is subjective. they both come from two diferent eras of Oakley and people are bound to agree or disagree with the current design aesthetic.

great post though.


oh, and i'd love $25.00 Timebombs too!

both, they are both unique.
both oakley,
both a looker

whoops sorry...I meant $250.00 timebombs although if anyone has one for $25.00 I'll definitely get that too! hehe

I would be glad to help anyone who wants one...pm me

Excellent, excellent analysis, Jon. Though I prefer the aesthetics of the TT more, your review was thorough enough to make me take pause!

A review on Timezone placing the TT as a best buy at its price point seems a very interesting. That place isn't known for their quartz love.

One thing to remember.. Tank on small wrists = goofy. TB on small wrists = just fine.

Sadly.

Yeah the (big)sizing of the TT is definitely a limiting factor, for me at least. That said, there is a trend towards oversized watches isn't there?

absolutely true. The TT is suitable for less wrists out there--which is sad because I've seen guys who were shorter than 5'5" with wrists smaller than mine sport a TT jangling around on their wrists. Already I think the Bomb looks out of place on my wrist but that was almost worthy of contempt...

I've heard reports that the Tanks battery reserve actually is capable of lasting 5 years, but don't really count on that unless you use none of the functions on the watch except its looking pretty. Plus being a battery powered watch without any internally moving parts--practically--it doesn't need the overhauling that most high end watches do.

and O-minous, yeah, there is. Where once anything over 33mm was once considered a big face, the TT is a colossal forty-something---high forty somethings.

Personally, I care less for this philosophy because the bigger watches tend to encourage a bling mentality. But I'm a guy who likes the "engineer's era" or watches---40's through mid 70's--where watches were between 36 and 38 mm mostly.

Hey, what's wrong with a Time Bomb jangling around on a skinny wrist?

I'm hurt, sniff, sniff...

There's always the risk it might fall off and get scratched.. you wouldn't want that now would you?

JT, you're absolutely right about people never using the chronograph. It's just become all about the "3 dials look" these days. Almost a shame when you have that fucntionality and never use it. Makes you wish they didn't actually have a chrono movement in it, which would probably make it cheaper too.