Best and durable Omega movement now?

Speedy13 · Jun 20, 2023

Hi all,

I am looking to buy another watch from Omega.. I am very happy that you have forum here and a lot of things have already discussed..
Anyway, what do you think about my thoughts and whether I am right?
I am looking for a watch that will sit in the box and will wear two-three times in a month and it should go without service at least 10 years - its a minimum.

Omega movements 8900(copy of 8500) potentially have 2 main problems:
1. Date problem quick hour hand. Weak part.
2. Absolutely quite rotor needs to be heavily oiled and without oil I guess it couldn't work properly for many years.

Omega 8800 movements don't have problems above. The rotor is a bit noisy, but far superior in terms of reliability co construction.
Could we say that 8800 is more 'durable' over long time?!?

The new chronographs from Omega are too thick, too complex and not cheap to service.

The last 3861 movements use the same Lemania based architecture (that means it has zero problems with availability of spare parts in the future) and some benefits from 8800 like Co-axial details and (thanks to Archer@) hopefully no bushing problems any more with extra jewels .. and even 1861 and 861 could last 10 years as well, so should we expect that 3861 should be incredibly reliable movement? Another benefit of Lemania I think here its relatively low beat 21 versus 25/28 and I guess that means less wear to the movement and longer life

The reason I raised this question, because the watch would be a present and it must be very durable in long term without service rule of 5-8 years.
What will happen to rotor after 10-15 years with 8800? Could it actually go without service that long?

Archer · Jun 20, 2023

S Speedy13
The last 3861 movements use the same Lemania based architecture (that means it has zero problems with availability of spare parts in the future)

Just so you know, very few parts are common between the 1861 and 3861.

Speedy13 · Jun 20, 2023

Archer
Just so you know, very few parts are common between the 1861 and 3861.

But it has the same platform and the same beat as 1861.
Also Omega indicates that 50% of the parts have been replaced with non-interchangeable parts. 50% and "very few".. is it that different?
I am sure they try to make calibers more interchangeable for future easy-service and support outdated models (that's why we saw co-axial in 3861 from 8800), but still I think 3861 is different enough from other Omega movements.
Its older platform and old style beat give me thoughts about better durability, but maybe I am wrong...

Archer · Jun 20, 2023

S Speedy13
Also Omega indicates that 50% of the parts have been replaced with non-interchangeable parts. 50% and "very few".. is it that different?

I have no idea how Omega has calculated that, but just looking at the technical guide, that 50% number makes no sense. They are likely counting everything down to the individual screws. So if you consider the single screw type that is used in 6 different locations as 6 parts, then that's the only way the old parts would even come close to equaling the number of new (different) parts.

If you go back and look at what I quoted, I am commenting on your stance that because they share a similar design, that parts availability won't be an issue. This implies that the common wear parts that would need replacing, are the same between these movements - they are not. You are not going to be able to fix your 3861 with 1861 parts. The parts that wear out are not the same at all.

So the most common parts I replace on the 861/1861 series for wear are the mainspring, third wheel, center wheel, fourth wheel, and some mainspring barrel parts. None of these are compatible from the 1861 to the 3861...

Davidt · Jun 20, 2023

Personally, I don’t have confidence in the future serviceability of the coaxial movements and can’t get over the fact that it seems little more than a marketing gimmick.
Most (all?) of the technical improvements Omega have made recently could have been incorporated into a movements with a standard Swiss lever escapement.

Sorry OP I realise this doesn’t address your question but im waiting for the day Omega release a 42mm Planet Ocean, under 13mm thickness and without the coaxial escapement.

Speedy13 · Jun 20, 2023

Archer
If you go back and look at what I quoted, I am commenting on your stance that because they share a similar design, that parts availability won't be an issue. This implies that the common wear parts that would need replacing, are the same between these movements - they are not. You are not going to be able to fix your 3861 with 1861 parts. The parts that wear out are not the same at all.

So the most common parts I replace on the 861/1861 series for wear are the mainspring, third wheel, center wheel, fourth wheel, and some mainspring barrel parts. None of these are compatible from the 1861 to the 3861...

In that case I got it wrong from what I have read... if it's so different...
Thank you for explanation, Archer. Your examples of work with details and contribution with simple members are terrific.

From your perspective, the auto with rotor 8800 will be worse choice than manual 3861 for long term infrequent use? I know for automatic watches the rotor/winding system used to be the weakest part (especially for 8900 caliber)
After 10-15 years of use do you really change the half of what you have listed for 861/1861? Or it's only for 25-30years+ models?

Overall, have you serviced any Omega that just need cleaning and new lubrication? Or these all discussions we have on the net about durability -> it's all just on paper and bla-bla? Only Rolex fans could say opposite 😀
For Speedmaster classical Moonwatch I thought it's super simple and super reliable movements here for decades + NASA tested, but after I have read your posts with "bushing" I said "wow"... these watches have weak points and that spots for decades.

Archer · Jun 20, 2023

All designs have weak points. If you keep the watches maintained properly, there won't be any issues.

spacemission · Jun 20, 2023

Archer
All designs have weak points. If you keep the watches maintained properly, there won't be any issues.

I agree.

Crunchie · Jun 22, 2023

To throw my own entirely amateur opinion in - while the Speedmaster was certified for use by NASA in a previous model variation, I think they were more concerned with performance over a period of hours or days, weeks at the most, and the question of if the service interval would be five years or ten would probably never be asked.
I would guess most decent watches *could* run accurately and without problems for a decade or more, worn daily or infrequently, but you’ll always get a percentage that fail earlier through a broken spring or accidental damage.

dstfno · Jun 22, 2023

Davidt
Personally, I don’t have confidence in the future serviceability of the coaxial movements and can’t get over the fact that it seems little more than a marketing gimmick.
Most (all?) of the technical improvements Omega have made recently could have been incorporated into a movements with a standard Swiss lever escapement.

Sorry OP I realise this doesn’t address your question but im waiting for the day Omega release a 42mm Planet Ocean, under 13mm thickness and without the coaxial escapement.

Omega will not move away from the co-axial escapement any time soon, if ever...

Davidt · Jun 22, 2023

dstfno

Omega will not move away from the co-axial escapement any time soon, if ever...

Oh I know. There’s far too much marketing and brand capital invested in it.

gbesq · Jun 22, 2023

Other than the fact that servicing the co-axial movements requires specilaized training and tools, I'm not sure what the concern is. My first Omega with a co-axial movement was a 2017 SMPc with the 2500d caliber. I recently sold the watch and in my six years of ownership the watch was relentlessly reliable and accurate -- no issues at all. I now own a Seamaster 300 Heritage with the co-axial caliber 8900 and so far the watch is demonstrating quartz like accuracy. We can argue all day about whether the co-axial escapement is the greatest leap forward in horology in the past 100 years or just marketing hype, but if the subject watch is accurate and reliable, who really cares?

Dan S · Jun 22, 2023

Empirically, I have found that Rolex watches continue to run for decades without being serviced. ::stirthepot::

gbesq · Jun 22, 2023

Dan S
Empirically, I have found that Rolex watches continue to run for decades without being serviced.

Yes, but after they finally break down after 25 years Rolex won't supply the parts to service them and you have to buy a new watch -- if one is actually available. 😁

spacemission · Jun 22, 2023

Dan S
Empirically, I have found that Rolex watches continue to run for decades without being serviced.

And omegas, poljots, etc.

SlowhandBuzz · Jun 22, 2023

My 8900 driven Creamsicle PO has been amazingly accurate over the 2+ years of ownership and rotational wear. I have absolutely zero regrets over that purchase.

Davidt · Jun 22, 2023

gbesq
Other than the fact that servicing the co-axial movements requires specilaized training and tools, I'm not sure what the concern is. My first Omega with a co-axial movement was a 2017 SMPc with the 2500d caliber. I recently sold the watch and in my six years of ownership the watch was relentlessly reliable and accurate -- no issues at all. I now own a Seamaster 300 Heritage with the co-axial caliber 8900 and so far the watch is demonstrating quartz like accuracy. We can argue all day about whether the co-axial escapement is the greatest leap forward in horology in the past 100 years or just marketing hype, but if the subject watch is accurate and reliable, who really cares?

Precisely because they require additional training and tools to service, but the components that require these, offer little/no benefit as far as I can tell.
It grinds my gears Omega over complicated the escapement for marketing points when the genuine, applaudable improvements could have been made with a standard escapement.
That added complication reduces the options for servicing. If in 10, 20 years time, Omega ditches the coaxial and no longer guarantees to service them or provide parts, where will they be serviced? The pool of WMers that can service them is already small and given the specific servicing requirements, most good independents without parts accounts will never have seen them.

Furthermore, there are issues associated with the coaxial aren’t there? Reports of barrels wearing prematurely, and didn’t they have to artificially slow down the rate of the movement to get the thing to work at all?

I’ve said it before and I stand by it. The coaxial escapement is an unnecessary, over complicated solution to a problem that didn’t exist.

Archer · Jun 22, 2023

Davidt
Furthermore, there are issues associated with the coaxial aren’t there? Reports of barrels wearing prematurely, and didn’t they have to artificially slow down the rate of the movement to get the thing to work at all?

Not sure where this comes from. The barrel has nothing to do with the escapement, so although some earlier models had barrel wear issues, tying that to the escapement isn't right.

As for the rate, I assume you mean the beat rate. Not sure what "artificially" means here, because there is no "natural" frequency for a balance. But some run at 25,200 and some at 28,800. As far as I know the models that run at 28,800 have no problems doing so...

Davidt · Jun 22, 2023

Archer
Not sure where this comes from. The barrel has nothing to do with the escapement, so although some earlier models had barrel wear issues, tying that to the escapement isn't right.

As for the rate, I assume you mean the beat rate. Not sure what "artificially" means here, because there is no "natural" frequency for a balance. But some run at 25,200 and some at 28,800. As far as I know the models that run at 28,800 have no problems doing so...

I’m happy to be corrected there and as I was tying it I did think ‘I bet the barrel wear has nothing to do with the escapement’.

However, I stand by my point around an over complicated solution, that restricts servicing options, for an imaginary problem.

Davidt · Jun 22, 2023

I can’t help but think Omega simply wanted to get something Rolex didn’t have/couldn’t get and I think that’s a shame. They should’ve focused on innovation where it provided a real benefit and had faith in the brand and product.

Best and durable Omega movement now?

Speedy13

Archer

Speedy13

Archer

Davidt

Speedy13

Archer

spacemission

Crunchie

dstfno

Davidt

gbesq

Dan S

gbesq

spacemission

SlowhandBuzz

Davidt

Archer

Davidt

Davidt

Similar threads

Vintage Omega movement parts - 30 mm, bumper and some full rotor

Vintage Omega movement parts - 30 mm, bump and some full rotor

Vintage Omega movement parts

Omega Speedy - what’s the best and why?

No Omega movement, but ETA

vintage Omega movement parts and indexes - 30 mm and bumper