Breaking News: The New Steel Speedmaster With Caliber 321 “Ed White”

Evitzee

Column wheel chronographs are not that rare, they used to be the standard construction for a chronograph mechanism. Besides the ones you mentioned there is the Rolex 4130 and the Frederic Piguet 1185 iterations. And the Breitling B09 (manual version of the B01).

El Primero's and F. Piguet's can be easily found on the used market for not too much money under various manufacturers. And you can find really nice ones with supremely finished Lemania movements (VC, Dubuis, Breguet and others) in gold cases from the early 21st century for about what the new Ed White is going to cost you. The finishing on these watches blows Omega's finishing into the weeds.

Travelller

Aside from of course, the new Omega 321, what other current-production column-wheel-based chronographs (in SS only) have caught your attention...?

T T3F

I’m pretty bummed because I had a few totally unrelated things come up that took my focus off of watches for a few days, and it stinks that a 48-hour delay in putting down a deposit might cost me a year as far as getting this watch, but it is what it is with these things.

tyrantlizardrex

Amazed at all the folks giving Omega an interest free loan for an indeterminate period of time.

T T3F

Discussions of value as it applies to luxury watches make zero sense to me — all luxury watches are innately a terrible value when evaluated from a practical standpoint. If you want one, have the money, and are willing to pay the price Omega is asking, then go for it, and if not, then don’t.

Alex87

Can you hack the 321?

Evitzee

It's in the ballpark I think. About 10% of the Apollo 11's came to the US, about 700 or so. Don't know how many of the SS ones will be made, maybe 1,500 a year? So I can see 100-150 coming to the US. I would expect production to be low to begin with in order to make sure everything is working.

gostang9

For everyone surprised / disappointed / angry about the price point if this special cal 321 re-issue, please read about Veblen Goods.

Travelller

...Sidebar:
*Some in current-production I know of and like (in SS only): Vacheron Constantin 2019's Cornes de Vache 1955 in SS (€40K), Blancpain's 2019 Air Command (€19K and limited to 500pcs), Zenith El Primero (€7.5K), Breitling Navitimer B01 (€8K), Tudor Heritage BB Chrono (€5K), Sinn 910 SRS (€4.5K, heavily modded 7750), Longines Single Push-Piece (€3K).

Aside from of course, the new Omega 321, what other current-production column-wheel-based chronographs (in SS only) have caught your attention...?

Evitzee

Column wheel chronographs are not that rare, they used to be the standard construction for a chronograph mechanism. Besides the ones you mentioned there is the Rolex 4130 and the Frederic Piguet 1185 iterations. And the Breitling B09 (manual version of the B01)...

Vix

The 9900 co-ax found in the Racing 44 has a column wheel, vertical clutch and is METAS certified.

Riviera Paradise

Perhaps also worth pointing out that many of the modern automatic column wheel chronograph movements such as the B01, 4130, 9900 also have a vertical clutch, which does not suffer from the jarring start of the chronograph hand.
The 321 is a column wheel movement that works with a lateral/horizontal clutch, so will still have the jumping hand when you start the chronograph, similar to the 1861. I would argue that the only functional gain from the 1861 to the 321 movement is having to use less force to engage the chronograph...well beyond the heritage factor, I really can't see the price justification for the 321 movement either from a performance factor or movement finishing perspective.
The 3861 from a functional perspective is superior to the 321, offering hacking seconds and the anti-magnetism of the Si14 balance spring. I would take both of these "features" over having to apply slightly less pressure on the chronograph button for the 321.

Travelller

I was under the impression that column-wheel systems were more complex than cam-actuated - both in the actual design / deployment as well as servicing... or am I wrong about that... 🤔

Archer

Yes, you are wrong about that. The added labour to service a column wheel v a cam is pretty much non-existent. Cheers, Al

padders

Other than cool points, which is as good a reason as any, I have found one other reason why the 321 is better than the 861/1861 in the Moonwatch. It is debatable whether it is a good reason, but if you want your chrono hand to hit the 4 sub-second marks on the std Moonwatch dial, you need a movement that runs at 5 or 10Hz, the 861/1861 runs at 6Hz so only ever hits the full second mark, it misses the rest by design. They fix this on other Omega models by utilising either 2 intermediate marks for the 1861 and 3 marks for the 3313 and 930X/990X movements which run at 8Hz (as used in the Speedmaster '57/Racing) but the 1861 Moonwatch still uses an incorrect 4 mark pattern. See below for a comparison:

Current 1861 Moonwatch, wrong number of marks for 6Hz movement frequency:



Silver Snoopy using correct 2 intermediate marks for the 1861



Speedmaster '57 using 9300 8Hz movement with correct 3 intermediate marks.



So much for the Speedmaster Moonwatch being a precision timing instrument, it hasn't been able to accurately time to a finer increment than 1 second since the 1969 movement change 😉

There you have it. If you want a watch with the std Moonswatch dial which can accurately measure elapsed time to within a quarter of a second, you need the 321, the 861/1861 are only giving an approximation. QED.