Hi,
I have recently bought an Omega Diver 300 GMT Chronograph, and wondered if there was any reason the chronograph complication shouldn't be left to run for long periods. I personally like to see a traditional large sweeping second hand, and when the function is not running there are 3 redundant hands pointing constantly to the 12 O'clock position, including the large second hand. I'm guessing there is no significant additional wear or load on the movement, since its a designed in function, and driven by parts already in motion.

Thanks

 

It's a beautifully designed and highly accurate tool made to do its job and do it well. Run it silly! I personally wouldn't think twice about it.

 

You don't give a model number, so I Googled the name you wrote and came up with a watch that uses a Cal. 3603. If that it the movement in your watch (always best to give more information rather than less, like the model number) this is a vertical clutch chronograph, so the added load to the movement when running it would be negligible. You may experience a slight decrease in run time.

In terms of wear, parts that are moving wear more than parts that are not moving. I would not expect the wear here to be significant.

The one thing that I would recommend is stopping the chronograph periodically, so the chronograph runner does not seize. Not sure if Omegas are prone to this, but the old Seiko vertical clutch chronographs are certainly...

Cheers, Al

 

Well, I personally wouldn't think twice about it but I am glad that @Archer did. Informative and not short of factual details as always, Sir. Thanks, Al.

 

Thanks Archer Apologies yes its the Seamaster Diver 300M Co-Axial GMT Chronograph (212.30.44.52.01.001) with the 3603 movement. Many thanks for your detailed reply. I did a little quick research and came across an article you wrote back in May 2013 detailing how the vertical and horizontal clutch mechanisms work (Thanks again, great to learn more about how these movements work). You refer to leaving the Chronograph running, but periodically stopping it to minimise the risk of the chronograph runner seizing. Can I ask what you would consider an appropriate timescale for periodic stopping, and how long for.
Cheers

 

Archer - Would you clarify on the origin of this movement? I was under the strong impression that this was a derivative of the 7750, arranged differently of course, but with a column wheel and coaxial set-up...

 

The 3603 uses an F. Piguet base, not the 7750.

I certainly have not done any research on this, but just throwing out a SWAG, I would say if you let the watch run with the chronograph off for a day every few weeks that should keep the two parts of the chronograph runner free.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks, Archer. Most appreciated. I've always liked the 33xx FP movements.

EDIT: The Omega 3601 was what I assumed the 3603 was based off of, which is, at its heart, an ETA 2892-A2 with a Dubois Depraz 2029 module, with the aforementioned column wheel and co-axial elements added:

 

Thanks again Al