Community Stories

Does the new (almost perfect) 2021 Moonwatch bracelet fit the previous gen?

S
Posts
127
Likes
154
I went to an Omega boutique today to check out the 2021 hesalite Moonwatch and In my opinion, the new brushed bracelet is about as close to perfection for this watch as possible for the following reasons (and these are all the same reasons I hated the previous gen bracelet and never wore it).

1. The hesalite version is totally brushed and very “tool-like”.
2. It has “female” end links which minimise the effective lug to lug length. With the previous gen, the “male” end links gave the watch effectively a 52-53mm lug to lug and I had significant overhang.
3. It is much lighter whilst still feeling premium.
4. It still only has 2 micro adjusts, but the links are much shorter, meaning 1 micro adjust is a little less than a half link in length difference.

Its almost as if the design brief was as follows: Go and build a slightly beefier modern interpretation of the 1711 bracelet, using all solid links and give it a nice, premium milled deployant clasp.

The point is, this bracelet perfectly captures the toolish bracelets of the 60s, but modernises it and adds a few luxury bits, like the clasp.

Now my questions.

1. Does this bracelet fit on the prior gen Moonwatch?
2. Can it be ordered from a boutique as a separate part and does anyone know the cost and/or part number?
3. If the end link does not fit the prior gen Moonwatch, what is the width of the Centrelink that goes into the end link, so I could potentially use a different end link? (Like an Uncle Seiko)

I know it’s early after release but I hope someone knows because I really, really need this bracelet on my prior gen Moonwatch. It’s perfect to me.
Edited:
 
Owlsu
Posts
255
Likes
273
The cheapest and easiest option if you want a way for the watch to wear smaller than it does on the bracelet is to honestly just put it on any leather/NATO/perlon. You'll get that effect where the straps drop straight down off the lugs and make it wear a lot smaller on the wrist compared to how any 90's to present day bracelet does which all have rigid sticking out endlinks.

I couldn't ever work out why it looked so small on my wrist on a leather strap and especially on a thin perlon until I realised that whole thing about the male/female fixed connecting links the bracelets use.
 
W
Posts
67
Likes
35
I would wager that given a few months, the bracelet would be available, if ordered through Omega.

That said, and despite the raving about the new bracelet, I have to say I am less than impressed. Holding the 2021 Moonwatch (in sapphire) in person, the head was very very well done. The difference in finish between the body (case) of the watch and bracelet was a noticeable mismatch to me. As well as the exaggerated taper to the clasp. The thin nature of the bracelet felt feminine to me, and did not exude the sturdy robust nature of the prior bracelet.

Now, I'm not saying the previous bracelet didn't warrant some improvements, but the width and finish consistency with the watch case at least made the entire watch appear harmonious.
 
Owlsu
Posts
255
Likes
273
W watchfisher
I would wager that given a few months, the bracelet would be available, if ordered through Omega.

That said, and despite the raving about the new bracelet, I have to say I am less than impressed. Holding the 2021 Moonwatch (in sapphire) in person, the head was very very well done. The difference in finish between the body (case) of the watch and bracelet was a noticeable mismatch to me. As well as the exaggerated taper to the clasp. The thin nature of the bracelet felt feminine to me, and did not exude the sturdy robust nature of the prior bracelet.

Now, I'm not saying the previous bracelet didn't warrant some improvements, but the width and finish consistency with the watch case at least made the entire watch appear harmonious.

I have an older 1861 and own multiple styles of bracelet for it from previous generations of Speedmaster and came to the same kind of conclusion as yourself. Whilst at first I loved the vintage looking taper when using bracelets on it that went from 20mm to 16mm at the clasp over time I just found that something felt really off about the extreme amount of taper - I don't think the problem is so bad on Rolex's which have the same 20mm to 16mm taper because most of them are thinner watch heads at around 11mm or 12mm and a lot are only 38mm or 40mm cases.

The taper down to 16mm (or even 15mm I believe in the new 3861) just looks a bit off when it's paired with the 42mm watch head and over 14mm thickness of the case itself. You end up with the really delicate and feminine looking bracelet almost with a massive thick masculine watch head and it's a strange mismatch.

I found it generally looks much better on any 20mm to 18mm taper leather strap or the previous generation 1861 bracelet which also tapered from 20mm to 18mm. It's a good balance between not looking feminine like a 16mm taper and not looking excessively masculine and aggressive like a non-tapering Seamaster bracelet which is 20mm straight through to the clasp.
 
S
Posts
127
Likes
154
W watchfisher
The difference in finish between the body (case) of the watch and bracelet was a noticeable mismatch to me. As well as the exaggerated taper to the clasp. The thin nature of the bracelet felt feminine to me, and did not exude the sturdy robust nature of the prior bracelet.

I would argue that you lack an historical understanding regarding bracelets in general, and those of the Speedmaster in particular. Across its 60+ year history across literally dozens and dozens of bracelets it has been issued on, not a single bracelet has even remotely resembled the much maligned 1998 bracelet.

At some point, the luxury watch manufacturers began to equate unnecessary weight with quality and gregarious use of high polish with value. Rigidity became valued over comfort as it too was equated with being “up market”. Form became valued over function but again this came at the cost of comfort.

But then the designers went back to the marketers and the response was “not rigid enough, not heavy enough, not shiny enough”, so then we lost almost all of the taper, all of the lateral flexibility and the associated comfort, and these ridiculous, disproportionately thick links, with these gaudy high polish mid links. So they fixed that, but then got stuck on the clasp. The previous stamped clasp with 6 or 7 micro adjusts just wouldn’t cut it, so off they went to the parts bin to find a plentiful and ludicrously chunky clasp.

The designers were unhappy - we are not producing half links, and these clasps only have 2 micro adjusts. This time the bean counters stepped in and said “that’s the one we’re using, we’ve used it on a bunch of other models, just engrave “Speedmaster” on it and call it a day, economies of scale and all that”.

Now, I'm not saying the previous bracelet didn't warrant some improvements, but the width and finish consistency with the watch case at least made the entire watch appear harmonious.

So as you can see from my previous text, I could not disagree with your above statement more. With the 1998 bracelet they turned a supremely comfortable, highly adjustable engineering instrument in which function almost always trumped form, into a heavy, ill fitting, unnecessarily blingy piece of jewellery for poseurs. In my opinion, putting all other factors aside, the 1171 style bracelet is one of the most comfortable watch bracelets ever made.

And guess what? As well as the majority of watch nerds agreeing with me, it would seem the designers at Omega have been listening as the new bracelet is absolutely an homage to those most archetypal of Moonwatch bracelets, the venerable 1171 or one of its kin, at least on the “proper” Moonwatch, with a crystal of hesalite where we have a complete lack of high polish on the bracelet.

So as I say goodbye, I will leave you with a few photos of the watch I wear as I type this, along with its glorious bracelet. You’ll notice from the second photo, the bracelet has HOLLOW END LINKS. Oh, the humanity!!

F443F8B0-B53B-4C67-90F9-979326F4AA58.jpeg 33C2369D-85D1-4C74-9C62-0C8436C875AA.jpeg F6A310AB-DA4D-4C5F-AA45-85D80DA1B694.jpeg


The “other” classic Speedmaster bracelet. The flat link.

EEFEE1B1-C29C-485A-9903-A95428B49786.jpeg
Edited:
 
S
Posts
127
Likes
154
Owlsu Owlsu
head and over 14mm thickness of the case itself. You end up with the really delicate and feminine looking bracelet almost with a massive thick masculine watch head and it's a strange mismatch.

I missed this part and a few observations, of that 14mm thickness, probably 2mm is domed crystal and so optically, it is perceived as a much thinner watch.

Secondly your strange obsession with “delicate” and “feminine” and things related to “Massive thick masculine heads” is what I find most strange.

Again, you would have to understand the history of the watch to understand this apparent mismatch. In the 1950s and 60s, 40-42mm watches were considered massive but they were still placed on contemporarily appropriate watch bracelets, just as this most recent Moonwatch has been. It’s quiet obviously a statement they are making.

What other piece of machinery or technology (or ANY watch for that matter) can you buy today that is essentially unchanged for 60 years and has continuously been on the market that entire time. It really is quite amazing in its purity.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
S SlCKB0Y
2. Can it be ordered from a boutique as a separate part and does anyone know the cost and/or part number?
3. If the end link does not fit the prior gen Moonwatch, what is the width of the Centrelink that goes into the end link, so I could potentially use a different end link? (Like an Uncle Seiko)

did you do any searching first?

don’t know where you’re located, but in the states cost is $680 and while the part can be ordered through an OB it may be several months (like, July/August) before delivery (Omega focusing on putting bracelets on watches first). I’ve ordered one and am effectively on “a list” for one when it comes in.
 
S
Posts
127
Likes
154
cvalue13 cvalue13
did you do any searching first?
I was remiss in this regard, so mea culpa.

don’t know where you’re located, but in the states cost is $680 and while the part can be ordered through an OB it may be several months (like, July/August) before delivery (Omega focusing on putting bracelets on watches first). I’ve ordered one and am effectively on “a list” for one when it comes in.

Im in Australia and I’ve found out that they are $1070AU which is the equivalent of $815US (we get ripped off for everything down here).

in the meantime, whilst I love the bracelet, I can’t say I’m at all fond of how the endlinks integrate with the lugs, they don’t seem to follow the profile in a pleasing way.

I’ll wait and see some more examples but at this time I’m thinking of getting the Apollo 11 50th Anniversary flat link bracelet as at least with that I know of a solution to get a pretty much perfect integration with the lugs.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
S SlCKB0Y
Im in Australia and I’ve found out that they are $1070AU which is the equivalent of $815US (we get ripped off for everything down here).

BTW, I was instructed on the other thread that outside the US it is common practice to quote prices inclusive of tax (while in the US, we more commonly quote pre-tax prices when speaking casually). So, the US $680 is more like $725-750, all in.
 
rudagger
Posts
217
Likes
185
S SlCKB0Y
Secondly your strange obsession with “delicate” and “feminine” and things related to “Massive thick masculine heads” is what I find most strange.

This comment reminds of this skit.FYI it doesn't seem like an obesession to me.
[/QUOTE]
 
Owlsu
Posts
255
Likes
273
S SlCKB0Y
I missed this part and a few observations, of that 14mm thickness, probably 2mm is domed crystal and so optically, it is perceived as a much thinner watch.

Secondly your strange obsession with “delicate” and “feminine” and things related to “Massive thick masculine heads” is what I find most strange.

Again, you would have to understand the history of the watch to understand this apparent mismatch. In the 1950s and 60s, 40-42mm watches were considered massive but they were still placed on contemporarily appropriate watch bracelets, just as this most recent Moonwatch has been. It’s quiet obviously a statement they are making.

What other piece of machinery or technology (or ANY watch for that matter) can you buy today that is essentially unchanged for 60 years and has continuously been on the market that entire time. It really is quite amazing in its purity.

I've been wearing mine on a 1499/842 all week and it just feels really narrow with that taper to 16mm. I think it looks a lot better either on leather straps that are 20>18 or NATO's/Perlon's and the like that are just 20>20. Maybe when the Speedmaster was a 39mm watch it might have looked better on a 20>16 or 19>16 or whatever it came on in the 50's and 60's.
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

Caliber561

The New 2021 Speedmaster Professional Moonwatch (Sapphire)

Caliber561 Modern Omega Watches
blubarb
blubarb
Posts
46
Views
53K