- Posts
- 83
- Likes
- 243
watcholone
·Can't wait for more pictures and a full-blown article on Frattelo... The watch looks super-awesome. For sure a «I want one» piece - but the price will hold me back for some time...
Breaking News: The New Steel Speedmaster With Caliber 321 “Ed White”
- Posts
- 67
- Likes
- 58
Icnbne
·It is very niche and it is not for everyone. One thing that I truly like about this watch - besides the incredible movement - is that it is not part of the industrialized way of producing a watch at Omega. One watchmaker is responsible for one entire watch, instead of parts going from workstation to workstation. I have been lucky to see the new workshop on the caliber 321, and there are actually people with screwdrivers there ;-)
- Posts
- 27,680
- Likes
- 70,342
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerIt is very niche and it is not for everyone. One thing that I truly like about this watch - besides the incredible movement - is that it is not part of the industrialized way of producing a watch at Omega. One watchmaker is responsible for one entire watch, instead of parts going from workstation to workstation. I have been lucky to see the new workshop on the caliber 321, and there are actually people with screwdrivers there ;-)
Yes, very unusual. It's like what watchmakers all over the world do every single day. 😉
- Posts
- 970
- Likes
- 1,508
timoss
·Maybe this has been discussed before, but it looks like the lugs do not have the chamfers--is that correct? If so is this a deliberate echo of the -64 Ed White's specifically?
Overall, I don't love it in pics. I think that is partly because it is the worn character/patina of original models that really appeals to me...
Overall, I don't love it in pics. I think that is partly because it is the worn character/patina of original models that really appeals to me...
- Posts
- 36
- Likes
- 168
Ahvera
·On the bracelet, is the contrast between the polished and brushed links a little more subtle than on the Apollo 11 50th Anniversary bracelet? It looks that way in the pictures and video you posted but maybe it's just the lighting.
- Posts
- 384
- Likes
- 645
frazierspa
·Yes, very unusual. It's like what watchmakers all over the world do every single day. 😉
True, but perhaps your comparison is apples to oranges as manufacturing 700,000 to 900,000 watches annually necessitates an assembly line production method for increased efficiencies?
Edited:
- Posts
- 27,680
- Likes
- 70,342
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerTrue, but perhaps your comparison is apples to oranges as manufacturing 700,000 to 900,000 watches annually necessitates an assembly line method for increased efficiencies?
Sure it does, but that doesn't make what Omega is doing with the new 321 based Speedmaster in any way "special"...
The watchmakers who do this every day include many in Omega's own service centers.
This "one watchmaker per watch" is pure marketing folks, nothing more. As I've said several times it would be a gravy job for anyone who is used to having to deal with worn out and heavily abused 321's like I see regularly. Assembling a movement using all brand new, good condition parts - it's a dream.
- Posts
- 189
- Likes
- 313
Denarius
·Thanks 😀 Super happy with it!
Congrats and a beautiful watch regardless of price and opinions, question if you dont mind - if you had a choice of this new watch or an original 64 EW with 1039 in very good condition, not mint as that would be a different price point, which would you choose?
- Posts
- 6,832
- Likes
- 13,793
Nobel Prize
··Spell Master!Congrats and a beautiful watch regardless of price and opinions, question if you dont mind - if you had a choice of this new watch or an original 64 EW with 1039 in very good condition, not mint as that would be a different price point, which would you choose?
if a watch is iconic enough to warrant a re-issue... then the original would always be more desirable no? If price is equal that is.
- Posts
- 398
- Likes
- 354
s2000_driver
·if a watch is iconic enough to warrant a re-issue... then the original would always be more desirable no? If price is equal that is.
Yup, the original will always be more desirable. The reissue is something that can be worn everyday. Vintage makes we worried about water damage from unexpected showers or a random splash...
- Posts
- 16,741
- Likes
- 47,365
STANDY
··schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collectorYup, the original will always be more desirable. The reissue is something that can be worn everyday. Vintage makes we worried about water damage from unexpected showers or a random splash...
That’s the problem most think that vintage watches aren’t able to cope with wearing.
A frequently serviced watch is capable of been worn daily.
(( A Speedmaster worn by Fred Smith for 50 years all of a sudden gets sold for $50k by Fred’s son and it’s too expensive to wear daily. ))
- Posts
- 67
- Likes
- 58
Icnbne
·if a watch is iconic enough to warrant a re-issue... then the original would always be more desirable no? If price is equal that is.
but Thats besides the point, i wear my reissue far more as its durable, water resistant and i’m less sensitive to a nick here or there
- Posts
- 1,396
- Likes
- 2,705
Martin_J_N
·That’s the problem most think that vintage watches aren’t able to cope with wearing.
A frequently serviced watch is capable of been worn daily.
(( A Speedmaster worn by Fred Smith for 50 years all of a sudden gets sold for $50k by Fred’s son and it’s too expensive to wear daily. ))
Or is it difficult to justify spending such a large sum on a very old watch when a shiny new one could be had for less than half that much, so the watch becomes a safe queen and something that is discussed in hushed tones with those that know 😉 😗 😉 😗
- Posts
- 398
- Likes
- 354
s2000_driver
·That’s the problem most think that vintage watches aren’t able to cope with wearing.
A frequently serviced watch is capable of been worn daily.
(( A Speedmaster worn by Fred Smith for 50 years all of a sudden gets sold for $50k by Fred’s son and it’s too expensive to wear daily. ))
Unfortunately unless you are the original owner, there's no way to know the service history of vintage watches. Most watch makers who service vintage watches won't guarantee water resistance, right? Especially ones that still have original crowns and chrono pushers. Why take the risk? That's just my opinion.
- Posts
- 16,741
- Likes
- 47,365
STANDY
··schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collectorUnfortunately unless you are the original owner, there's no way to know the service history of vintage watches. Most watch makers who service vintage watches won't guarantee water resistance, right? Especially ones that still have original crowns and chrono pushers. Why take the risk? That's just my opinion.
More of talking about the people that buy a expensive watch and don’t wear it like it is capable of being worn.
(More the Rolex worn everyday for 50 years, owner dies, watch gets sold watch never gets worn again as it’s now a investment or it’s viewed too expensive to wear. Had the owner still been alive the watch would still be worn everyday)
I have a mate that took off a new 300m diver off to put his hand in a half full fish tank to get a turtle out. Sorry @Patg 😁
- Posts
- 360
- Likes
- 367
kelsey
·Congrats and a beautiful watch regardless of price and opinions, question if you dont mind - if you had a choice of this new watch or an original 64 EW with 1039 in very good condition, not mint as that would be a different price point, which would you choose?
Example the recent moonshine 50th can just as easy pick up original but went the new release. Also I would never buy any watch I wouldn’t wear, and new is always going to stand up better to daily wear.
I’d definitely go the new 321 over the original, have no interest whatsoever in the original.
Just because the market or so called ‘collectors’ call something ‘valuable’ doesn’t mean I personally do.
Though I do have respect for genuine vintage collectors, takes good knowledge to navigate that minefield, for some I guess that’s part of the fun.
- Posts
- 9,724
- Likes
- 15,317
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Without a doubt I’d always choose the new reissue over any vintage watch.
Example the recent moonshine 50th can just as easy pick up original but went the new release. Also I would never buy any watch I wouldn’t wear, and new is always going to stand up better to daily wear.
I’d definitely go the new 321 over the original, have no interest whatsoever in the original.
Just because the market or so called ‘collectors’ call something ‘valuable’ doesn’t mean I personally do.
Though I do have respect for genuine vintage collectors, takes good knowledge to navigate that minefield, for some I guess that’s part of the fun.
Interesting and quite unusual perspective. So you are happy to pay the massive premium the new 321 watches have because of the interest in the originals from ‘so called collectors’ (a little dismissive I would suggest of fellow forumites) but think the originals have no value to you? There is a bit of a paradox there I would say.
- Posts
- 360
- Likes
- 367
kelsey
·Interesting and quite unusual perspective. So you are happy to pay the massive premium the new 321 watches have because of the interest in the originals from ‘so called collectors’ (a little dismissive I would suggest of fellow forumites) but think the originals have no value to you? There is a bit of a paradox there I would say.
I’m not interested in the new 321 because it’s a remake of anything I’d be interested in it on its own merit whether or not any original existed.
I wasn’t trying to have a go at vintage collectors, I was referring to the people who ramp price up with a good story for profit motivates and label themselves as collectors, dealers, auction houses etc
If you put a Paul Newman Daytona in my hand and said it’s worth $500 or $17million to collectors neither is it’s value both are merely price, it itself would be of no value to me and I’m sure to most of the planet unless they are told it’s ‘valuable’.
Edited:
- Posts
- 9,724
- Likes
- 15,317
padders
··Oooo subtitles!I’m lost because I don’t see any massive premium in this watch?
I’m not interested in the new 321 because it’s a remake of anything I’d be interested in it on its own merit whether or not any original existed.
I wasn’t trying to have a go at vintage collectors, I was referring to the people who ramp price up with a good story for profit motivates and label themselves as collectors, dealers, auction houses etc
If you put a Paul Newman Daytona in my hand and said it’s worth $500 or $17million to collectors neither is it’s value both are merely price, it itself would be of no value to me and I’m sure to most of the planet unless they are told it’s ‘valuable’.
You can’t see any 321 premium? The FOIS is circa £3,500 at list, the EW reboot ~£13,000. I make that as near as dammit a £10K premium for a column wheel. Even if movement parts were made of solid Rhodium that would be steep. I do like the fact they have rereleased the EW, but I also can understand that the reason it exists is because of market demand for the originals.
- Posts
- 360
- Likes
- 367
kelsey
·You can’t see any 321 premium? The FOIS is circa £3,500 at list, the EW reboot ~£13,000. I make that as near as dammit a £10K premium for a column wheel. Even if movement parts were made of solid Rhodium that would be steep. I do like the fact they have rereleased the EW, but I also can understand that the reason it exists is because of market demand for the originals.
You’re saying though a watch built on a production line as a tool watch and then decay for 50 years is more valuable then a brand new watch built as a luxury watch assembled by a single watchmaker? Interesting....
