- Posts
- 41
- Likes
- 36
Goldy
·Just watch the film Glass Onion on Netflix and has a nice shot of Daniel Craig wearing the 1948 Sub dial watch.
Baselworld 1948 Seamaster
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 3,868
imranbecks
·Shows how well a product placement can work in a movie. I'm sure interest for the watch has peaked ever since the movie was released. And this is for a watch that was released 4 years ago. Such a good looking watch. Loved the small seconds version when it was first released but I remember not liking the display caseback that has been obstructed from view with the commemorative designs engraved over it.
- Posts
- 419
- Likes
- 185
snunez
·Shows how well a product placement can work in a movie. I'm sure interest for the watch has peaked ever since the movie was released. And this is for a watch that was released 4 years ago. Such a good looking watch. Loved the small seconds version when it was first released but I remember not liking the display caseback that has been obstructed from view with the commemorative designs engraved over it.
- Posts
- 13,201
- Likes
- 22,955
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 3,868
imranbecks
·Pretty much sums up my thoughts on all coaxial Omegas.
- Posts
- 5,989
- Likes
- 28,661
YY77
·Yeah. It's the movement that makes all the modern Omega's thick.
https://omegaforums.net/threads/was-omega-as-prestigious-in-the-50-60s.152521/page-4#post-2078914
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 3,868
imranbecks
·There must be a reason why they made it thicker then. If it's not about the movement, then why? 😕
- Posts
- 115
- Likes
- 116
jjjones
·There must be a reason why they made it thicker then. If it's not about the movement, then why? 😕
- Posts
- 1,567
- Likes
- 2,677
Caliber561
·There must be a reason why they made it thicker then. If it's not about the movement, then why? 😕
- Posts
- 10,440
- Likes
- 16,324
padders
··Oooo subtitles!
The pre-coax Omega 1120 movement (a modified ETA 2892-A2) was only 3.6mm deep so in fact coax does seem to add thickness, circa 0.5 - 1mm I would suggest. Not huge, but not nothing.
- Posts
- 29,672
- Likes
- 76,830
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerThe pre-coax Omega 1120 movement (a modified ETA 2892-A2) was only 3.6mm deep so in fact coax does seem to add thickness, circa 0.5 - 1mm I would suggest. Not huge, but not nothing.
The 1120 is actually 3.9 mm, so the difference between that and a 2500 is 0.2 mm. I personally have not checked to see if this difference is due to the co-axial escapement, or the implementation of the free sprung balance with weights...my gut tells me it's likely more the balance than anything else.
- Posts
- 13,201
- Likes
- 22,955
Davidt
·I don’t think the insistence on sapphire casebacks on dive watches helps. Regardless, case thickness (and lack of options getting the coaxial escapement serviced) is the reason I don’t own a modern omega.
- Posts
- 10,440
- Likes
- 16,324
padders
··Oooo subtitles!The 1120 is actually 3.9 mm, so the difference between that and a 2500 is 0.2 mm. I personally have not checked to see if this difference is due to the co-axial escapement, or the implementation of the free sprung balance with weights...my gut tells me it's likely more the balance than anything else.
https://gleave.london/content/TECH/Omega 1120.pdf
I realise I am splitting hairs And further realise you have access to the latest sheet.
Edited:
- Posts
- 29,672
- Likes
- 76,830
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerInteresting. There seems to be conflicting info on that. I’ve seen an Omega data sheet on the 1120 that suggests 4mm but also this Omega makes one that states the same 3.6mm as the ETA sheet for the 2892:
https://gleave.london/content/TECH/Omega 1120.pdf
I realise I am splitting hairs.
That dates from 1995, so this is most likely an error earlier on that was corrected later. This one dates from 2010...
I can tell you for sure (because I've tried it) that you cannot replace a 2892 barrel bridge with an Omega 1120 bridge, because the Omega bridge is thicker, and it will prevent the rotor from making a 360 revolution. So there's no way they were ever the same thickness.
The 1109/110 are 3.6 mm, because they are just rebadged 2892's.
- Posts
- 10,440
- Likes
- 16,324
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Fair enough. You have said before that the 1120 is not just a superficial 2892 mod and this suggests that is the case.
Perhaps my thinking is clouded by the fact that every time the SMP was upgraded or changed it got thicker, noticeably when the 2500 then 8800 were fitted though I realise as noted above that wasn’t all movement!
Perhaps my thinking is clouded by the fact that every time the SMP was upgraded or changed it got thicker, noticeably when the 2500 then 8800 were fitted though I realise as noted above that wasn’t all movement!
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 3,868
imranbecks
·I don’t think the insistence on sapphire casebacks on dive watches helps. Regardless, case thickness (and lack of options getting the coaxial escapement serviced) is the reason I don’t own a modern omega.
Makes sense with regards to the sapphire caseback. That crystal alone is pretty thick and would contribute as a factor as to the thickness of the overall case to accommodate that crystal on the caseback.
Similar threads
- Posts
- 13
- Views
- 4K
- Posts
- 16
- Views
- 3K
- Posts
- 5
- Views
- 22K
