Cal 561 vs 564 desirability in a 168.005

gatorcpa

I don’t consider them “more desirable”. I have a few 564/751 movements and the quick change date can be problematic if not serviced correctly. Good news is that 564 date can also be advanced through the 9pm-1am cycle, similar to 561.

I’d say no difference price-wise, but watch out for the quick date.
gatorcpa

Peemacgee

When I first started collecting - having read extensively about Constellations I was somewhat obsessed about having a Constellation with the ‘zenith’ of Omega’s movements, the cal 564.

Even when the forum grandees lauded the 561as the finest movement, I would be confused and think “why don’t / aren’t they praising the ‘better’ 564?”

Eventually I realised that the 564 isn’t better, just different. ( think of it as having an additional complication)

In fact, due to its perceived fragility some avoid the 564 - but taking on board the advice of watchmakers like @Archer it shouldn’t present any issues if treated carefully.
I haven’t had a single quickset mechanism break on me (yet!)

The 564 was seen as a development with the quickset date but in terms of quality it is not necessarily better or more desirable.

hoipolloi

564= cannon pinion saver.

norb1967

But isn’t cannon pinion wear not that common? Or does it happen a lot

hoipolloi

I have heard complaints about worn cannon pinion on 561, 562 but nothing from 564, 565.
From my own collections, I have some loose cannon pinion on 561, but not on 564, 565.

Archer

I would take a quick set date version any day, over a non quick set date...

norb1967

Okay. That’s interesting. How easy are cannon pinion issues to solve?

hoipolloi

You need to remove the dial and hands. Get access to the cannon pinion and this tool.

Archer

I would take a quick set date version any day, over a non quick set date...