Community Stories

Automatic c1861?

Archer
Posts
29,920
Likes
77,370
mzinski mzinski
Themselves. They implemented Daniels’ coaxial escapement into mass produced movements. Why not continual to evolve more movements to accept it?

Keeping up to themselves? An odd concept...

That aside, are you referring to automatic movements, or have you now switched to talking about co-axial escapements? If it's the latter, they have already done so in the 3861...whether it's really an evolution is very much up for debate, but that's an entirely different topic.
 
Foo2rama
Posts
18,249
Likes
27,588
mzinski mzinski
Themselves. They implemented Daniels’ coaxial escapement into mass produced movements. Why not continual to evolve more movements to accept it?
You know they just put the co axial into the 861 right? As the 3861 and it’s used in the anniversary LE’s and it appears it will replace the 1861.

All Omega watches are co axial at this point I believe put side of a few quartz models.

*note: I am not saying the co axial is better.
 
mzinski
Posts
487
Likes
1,719
Foo2rama Foo2rama
You know they just put the co axial into the 861 right? As the 3861 and it’s used in the anniversary LE’s and it appears it will replace the 1861.

All Omega watches are co axial at this point I believe put side of a few quartz models.

*note: I am not saying the co axial is better.

I didn’t but I do now! I think that’s great.
 
mzinski
Posts
487
Likes
1,719
Archer Archer
Keeping up to themselves? An odd concept...

That aside, are you referring to automatic movements, or have you now switched to talking about co-axial escapements? If it's the latter, they have already done so in the 3861...whether it's really an evolution is very much up for debate, but that's an entirely different topic.

Sorry, I think I’ve lead the conversation astray. Let me try to get back to point and concisely (as best I can) explain myself.
I originally was curious is the 321/861/1861 line up of movements had been evolved to include an automatic option. I was specifically interested in that line up as i aesthetically like the dial layout with those movements in particular.
At 6.8mm it doesn’t seem unreasonable to consider maybe adding automatic works but I concede it might get a bit thick (then again the 7750 is 7.9mm).
I then used the word innovation to describe my self-interested evolution of the 321/861/1861 movements. I think they’re pretty great as they are. But in my humble and personal opinion I think adding an automatic works would make them more awesome. And I got distracted by my own use of the word and thought about how a coaxial would also make them more better.
Personally I think the coaxial is pretty darn cool and I’m pleased to learn the 3861 will have it.
Admittedly, I new to the world of Omega and I’ve only just dipped my toes into it with a Reduced. Do I regret that model? No. It’s been a great entry into Omegas and I actually do admire the dial too. But it has also got me inspired to pursue more - particularly the professional Speedmasters.
Anyways, take this as a thank you for all the insights to the movements and options out there! This has been a short form lesson for me.
 
Rocaway
Posts
11
Likes
127
I am in the same position as mzinski, started with a reduced and went on to more. The reduced being the first, it will always be special
Edited:
 
Blackdog
Posts
287
Likes
443
Foo2rama Foo2rama
You know they just put the co axial into the 861 right? As the 3861 and it’s used in the anniversary LE’s and it appears it will replace the 1861.
Maybe for some LEs and special models, but across the board would be rather unlikely. The moment they do that the Speedmaster is no longer "Flight qualified by NASA for all manned space missions".

I predict that there will always be a Speedy Pro powered by an 861 of some kind, hesalite crystal and solid case back (with the NASA inscription) in the lineup.

Funny thing: they could drop the 321 in there and keep the NASA inscription... Now that could be a way to sell a premium version of the Speedy Pro: The REAL Moonwatch !
 
Foo2rama
Posts
18,249
Likes
27,588
Blackdog Blackdog
Maybe for some LEs and special models, but across the board would be rather unlikely. The moment they do that the Speedmaster is no longer "Flight qualified by NASA for all manned space missions".

I predict that there will always be a Speedy Pro powered by an 861 of some kind, hesalite crystal and solid case back (with the NASA inscription) in the lineup.

Funny thing: they could drop the 321 in there and keep the NASA inscription... Now that could be a way to sell a premium version of the Speedy Pro: The REAL Moonwatch !

NASA no longer uses the watch officially. It was last certified in 79 for the STS missions.

Russians use them on spacewalks, and almost everyone wears one on launch on recovery outside the escape suit on the Soyuz system.

The watch has already changed in one major way from it’s certification, and 2 minor mechanical ways since 1979.
 
Northernman
Posts
4,440
Likes
18,259
A6070418-A7D3-49B4-8784-DCB5DC3CE041.jpeg 7F45786D-BFF8-4379-8669-5B5AE2AD67D2.jpeg
The cal CH27, later designated cal 23x0 (320) and 25x0 (321) have been tweaked in many ways over the years.
First as the automatic version of 1947, later “in house” by Lemania/Nouvelle Lemania with such complications as rattrapante and tourbillon, and with various other modifications by companies like Patek Phillippe, Vacheron and a select few others. Presently the basis is still in use for several Breguet models.
 
Screwbacks
Posts
1,770
Likes
5,576
Omega cannot make an automatic 1861 anymore because omega has already developed its first automatic chronograph lemania1040 in 1969 or 70. There was a rush competition at that time with zenith. The1861 is a later mechanism though based on cal861. To make another automatic chronograph for 1861 would be impractical to say the least because one will compete with the other under the same brand.
 
Northernman
Posts
4,440
Likes
18,259
Screwbacks Screwbacks
Omega cannot make an automatic 1861 anymore because omega has already developed its first automatic chronograph lemania1040 in 1969 or 70. There was a rush competition at that time with zenith. The1861 is a later mechanism though based on cal861. To make another automatic chronograph for 1861 would be impractical to say the least because one will compete with the other under the same brand.
The 1040 was developed by Lemania.
As all other Omega branded chronograph and other complicated watches from 1932 until the SSIH (now Swatch Group) had to sell Lemania in order to avoid bankruptcy in 1981.
Omega did not obtain the ability to make their own chronograph movements until much later.
The 1861/1040/1045 movements were all made by Lemania/Nouvelle Lemania.
 
Northernman
Posts
4,440
Likes
18,259
Screwbacks Screwbacks
The1861 is a later mechanism though
True in technical terms, however the 1861 is just a slightly updated 861. Not really a separate design in itself.
 
Foo2rama
Posts
18,249
Likes
27,588
Northernman Northernman
True in technical terms, however the 1861 is just a slightly updated 861. Not really a separate design in itself.
Finish only...
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

Joao_BRA

Omega Cal. 1120 Automatic Winding Test Help

Joao_BRA Modern Omega Watches
Annapolis
Annapolis
Posts
16
Views
328
sercesh

Speedmaster 57(41.5, Automatic Version) Alternative Bracelet

sercesh Modern Omega Watches
sercesh
sercesh
Posts
0
Views
82
andythegeo

Question: AT38 cal 8800 click/ping on automatic winding

andythegeo Modern Omega Watches
YY77
YY77
Posts
1
Views
89
B

1955 Omega 18ct Gold Automatic Cal. 501: Value Help

brian535 Modern Omega Watches
Dan S
Dan S
Posts
1
Views
159
matthew_VA

TAG Heuer Carrera Calibre 16 Automatic Chronograph Fullset!

matthew_VA Private Watch Sales
drpaul
drpaul
Posts
1
Views
353
F

Power Reserve Indicator with an Automatic Movement?

fabs Open Discussion
Togri v. 2.0
Togri v. 2.0
Posts
6
Views
175