Community Stories

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

timelightsky
Posts
15
Likes
14
Thanks Al, what a great explanation in this and your previous posts!

Regarding the "feel" of starting/stopping a column wheel vs. cam operated chronograph: I have in front of me 2 of each -- Zenith 420, Seiko 6139, Omega 1861, Poljot 3133. The feel is quite different between all of them but for me seems to depend on the individual design and adjustment of the movement rather than column wheel vs. cam. What say those who have handled a lot more chronographs than I have?
 
watchtinker
Posts
381
Likes
398
Archer Archer
Just some perspective on how these two systems really compare to each other. People often say that Omega changed from the cam to the column wheel to cut costs, but having serviced a lot of each and seen the wear/damage that happens on the column wheel 321's, I would argue they made these changes as much for reliability as for cost savings.

Thank you for having spared some valuable time to explain what is adamant from a technical standpoint. In over thirty years I have very seldom found problems with the cam system, if any. But this might not be what people like to to hear. 😉
 
GadgetGuy88
Posts
246
Likes
622
Britinus Britinus
If any of their brands can do it it will be Omega with its history, heritage etc. no downside for them giving it a try. As I said the proof will be the trading value 2/3 years hence.

Has Richemont succeeded? Maybe with some Lange one-offs.

I agree that it is a challenge for the Swatch/LVMH/Richemont houses to do this predictably.
 
Archer
Posts
27,683
Likes
70,355
timelightsky timelightsky
Thanks Al, what a great explanation in this and your previous posts!

Regarding the "feel" of starting/stopping a column wheel vs. cam operated chronograph: I have in front of me 2 of each -- Zenith 420, Seiko 6139, Omega 1861, Poljot 3133. The feel is quite different between all of them but for me seems to depend on the individual design and adjustment of the movement rather than column wheel vs. cam. What say those who have handled a lot more chronographs than I have?

Indeed there are other factors involved. The state of the pushers is certainly one, because if they are all filled with dirt or the seals have turned to black goop, it will definitely affect the feel of the switching. Then different brands handle other things differently - for example the 6139 is a vertical clutch mechanism and the 420 is horizontally coupled.

But having switched both systems while they were out of the case, using the same movement holder, this eliminates outside variables such as the pushers and even different brands - comparing the 321 and 861/1861 directly I think my description of the differences is representative of the two movements.
 
timelightsky
Posts
15
Likes
14
Archer Archer
Indeed there are other factors involved. The state of the pushers is certainly one, because if they are all filled with dirt or the seals have turned to black goop, it will definitely affect the feel of the switching. Then different brands handle other things differently - for example the 6139 is a vertical clutch mechanism and the 420 is horizontally coupled.

But having switched both systems while they were out of the case, using the same movement holder, this eliminates outside variables such as the pushers and even different brands - comparing the 321 and 861/1861 directly I think my description of the differences is representative of the two movements.

Thanks that makes a lot of sense. Then in articles and reviews the "all else being equal" is omitted, and one gets the impression the real-life difference in feel is much larger than it actually is.
 
Evitzee
Posts
6,958
Likes
13,016
Looking at Al's two videos it would seem from an engineering perspective that the cam system looks a lot simpler in design, construction and operation. If that is so why would the ancient watch movement designers start out with the column wheel design which would be a lot more difficult to manufacture compared to the cam system, especially with the machinery available to them at the time? Perhaps they started with a column wheel design and the herd mentality said 'don't change what works, that's the proper way to build a chronograph'.
 
Caliber561
Posts
1,501
Likes
2,569
Evitzee Evitzee
Looking at Al's two videos it would seem from an engineering perspective that the cam system looks a lot simpler in design, construction and operation. If that is so why would the ancient watch movement designers start out with the column wheel design which would be a lot more difficult to manufacture compared to the cam system, especially with the machinery available to them at the time?
Probably because the shuttle & cam system simply wasn't invented until relatively recently.
 
watchtinker
Posts
381
Likes
398
Evitzee Evitzee
Looking at Al's two videos it would seem from an engineering perspective that the cam system looks a lot simpler in design, construction and operation. If that is so why would the ancient watch movement designers start out with the column wheel design which would be a lot more difficult to manufacture compared to the cam system, especially with the machinery available to them at the time? Perhaps they started with a column wheel design and the herd mentality said 'don't change what works, that's the proper way to build a chronograph'.

Simply because the first cronographs were mono-pusher. 😁
 
scapa
Posts
1,437
Likes
2,208
timelightsky timelightsky
Thanks Al, what a great explanation in this and your previous posts!

Regarding the "feel" of starting/stopping a column wheel vs. cam operated chronograph: I have in front of me 2 of each -- Zenith 420, Seiko 6139, Omega 1861, Poljot 3133. The feel is quite different between all of them but for me seems to depend on the individual design and adjustment of the movement rather than column wheel vs. cam. What say those who have handled a lot more chronographs than I have?

I have two of the same as you, plus a Longines nearly-column wheel, a Sinn 356, a Breguet Type XX that has seen much better days and an IWC Pilot Chrono (7750-based, IIRC). I'd rank the 1861 and the Longines at the top, with the Longines being a bit "smoother" and the 1861 being a bit "snappier." The Sinn chrono is comparatively hard to activate, and the IWC is noticeably "squishier." The Type XX is boxed up for service and sale but when it ran properly it had a pretty distinctive chrono-pusher response, with a shallow but smooth initial push followed by a noticeable spring-back -- but it has hardly ever run properly, so I have no idea if mine is representative of the breed.

I do have a vintage Hanhart mono-pusher design in the vault -- from memory, it's noisy and not particularly satisfying. I am a rank amateur at this watch-movement business, and can freely state that I know absolutely nothing, but I find the 1861 to strike a nice balance between "feel" and accuracy in terms of starting and stopping and resetting. I'm not sure I'd sacrifice that accuracy for improved ergonomics -- but then I build and run ancient-technology tube amplifiers, so I'm biased towards reliability over practically everything else.
 
JohnnyRocket
Posts
222
Likes
290
As cool as it would be to have a 321... and it is a lovely watch the Price point is
High. You could get a X or Z 33 plus a Moon Watch Pro for the same price combined. Or Maybe a Bond. Pick your poison.
Love to have it . Can’t justify it as I have a Speedy Pro that’s a almost a year old.
I’ll stick with my Apollo 8 DSOTM. Sorry Omega!
 
Evitzee
Posts
6,958
Likes
13,016
Caliber561 Caliber561
Probably because the shuttle & cam system simply wasn't invented until relatively recently.
But if it is a simpler system WHY wasn't it invented earlier? That's what I'm asking.
 
g-boac
Posts
433
Likes
381
Hi Al, what causes the column wheel to break? i.e., is there some sort of side loading due to other parts in the train of parts between pusher and column wheel wearing and coming out of alignment, or attempting to force a pusher while bound or jammed? Or is this simply something that happens due to poor design and loading a pillar on the column wheel in shear or bending that eventually causes the pillar to fail?

Are there any preventative measures that we as users can take to prevent column wheels from breaking?
 
Caliber561
Posts
1,501
Likes
2,569
Evitzee Evitzee
But if it is a simpler system WHY wasn't it invented earlier? That's what I'm asking.
Who knows? It's entirely possible that it just wasn't thought of at the time.
 
incursore61
Posts
72
Likes
35
tyrantlizardrex tyrantlizardrex
Wasn't it 2000 pieces a year, rather than "only X number"?
Thanks for the reply, but 2000 per year does not mean 2000 in total .. they could produce for 20 years, they could increase (or decrease) the annual production ..... I mean there is no certainty about it.
 
tyrantlizardrex
Posts
8,890
Likes
28,361
incursore61 incursore61
Thanks for the reply, but 2000 per year does not mean 2000 in total .. they could produce for 20 years, they could increase (or decrease) the annual production ..... I mean there is no certainty about it.

I agree with you (both here and on your previous post).

All the information released states that they are aiming for 2000 pieces a year, and that the watch is not limited in edition.

So they could make 2000 a year forever - or it could be a total failure, and they might only make 3,500 before calling it quits
 
Martin_J_N
Posts
1,396
Likes
2,705
tyrantlizardrex tyrantlizardrex
I agree with you (both here and on your previous post).

All the information released states that they are aiming for 2000 pieces a year, and that the watch is not limited in edition.

So they could make 2000 a year forever - or it could be a total failure, and they might only make 3,500 before calling it quits

And if Omega only make 3500 watches then those silly people who have stumped up the cash for one will have a very collectible watch, won't they? 😉
 
tyrantlizardrex
Posts
8,890
Likes
28,361
Martin_J_N Martin_J_N
And if Omega only make 3500 watches then those silly people who have stumped up the cash for one will have a very collectible watch, won't they? 😉

Low production does not always equal collectible, nor desirable.
 
1455 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

Omegafanman

Caliber 321"Ed White" 311.30.40.30.01.001 Speedmaster thread

Omegafanman Modern Omega Watches
Omegafanman
Omegafanman
Posts
11
Views
7K
Robert-Jan

Hands-On With The New Omega Speedmaster Calibre 321 In Canopus Gold (Live Pictures)

Robert-Jan Modern Omega Watches
Trog
Trog
Posts
40
Views
11K
Travelller

Speedmaster Caliber 321 "Ed White" - A Pictorial Review

Travelller Omega Watch Reviews
Evitzee
Evitzee
Posts
122
Views
52K
cvalue13

Hot Takes: Speedmaster Moonwatch 321 “Ed White”/“Cernan” in Stainless Steel (2020) Review

cvalue13 Omega Watch Reviews
frazierspa
frazierspa
Posts
43
Views
38K