Hi everyone. I have just joined as I am interested in purchasing a Speedmaster Professional in the next month or two. I have in the past owned a Seamaster, however as I got it (just after Goldeneye came out) when I was young and naive I bought the quartz version. I recently sold it and want to make sure I make the right model choice with my next purchase. I have read online a little about the various Speedmaster models and have become a little confused and overwhelmed. From what I can gather the model I like the most is the Speedmaster Professional but I'm confused with the ref numbers (3573.50, 3570.50 etc). I wish to keep the model as close to the original moon watch as possible. I also understand the original is manual wind and not automatic. It is a manual wind I desire. I also see some have glass backs to the case. I also notice that the current model has a two tone braclet while some of the older models have a more plain braclet. I also seem to like the dome glass.
Sorry If I seem a little green. Any help will be much appreciated. My other choice of watch is a Rolex GMT or Sub however I like the Omega just as much and for the price of less than a new Sub I may be able to get a vintage Speedmaster.

 

If you pick modern Speedmaster then 3570.50 is the closest one to original moonwatch. If you plan to hunt for vintage the original one is ref 145.022-69. The first gen will have script only in case back.
Both have solid case back and hesalite crystal.

 

Hi Neville - if you are looking for a modern Speedmaster, the 3570.50.00 is the current-production iteration of the moonwatch. A "reference number" is the term used by watch manufacturers for "model number". So, a different reference number will mean that there is something different about the watch. In the case of the 3573.50.00, Omega replaces the solid caseback with a transparent sapphire crystal, and also replaces the acrylic ("Hesalite") crystal in front with sapphire. It's worth pointing out that the original moonwatch that flew to the moon had an acrylic crystal (because acrylic will not shatter if damaged - something critical to prevent in zero gravity), and a solid caseback. So again, if you're looking for the closest descendant to the original moonwatch, that's the 3570.50.00. Which is a very popular and great-looking watch.

It's also worth noting that reference numbers are (to our knowledge) arbitrarily assigned. For example, in "3570.50.00", each numeral does not represent a specific attribute (e.g., acrylic crystal, stainless steel case, manual wound, chronograph, etc etc). There was some push by Omega to do this in the late 60s, but that system was eventually abandoned.

Now, if you're looking for a true vintage Speedmaster, as in the same make and model (i.e., "reference") that flew to the moon, that would be what is known as a "pre-moon" Speedmaster, and the reference numbers for these are 105.012-65, 105.012-66, and 145.012-67. They are also called "321 Speedmasters", because the movement (the "engine") that powered the watch was the calibre Ω321. The prices for these are fairly reasonable.

A quick chronology of Speedmaster references is below:
Calibre 321, 1957-1968: CK2915, CK2998, 105.002, 105.003, 105.012, 145.012
Calibre 861, 1969-1996: 145.022. . .then some other numbers I'm not sure of
Calibre 1861, 1996-present: 3570.50.00

Finally, one of our members here, Spacefruit, posted a very comprehensive thread on another forum, essentially an introductory guide to Speedmaster 321 sourcing:

Thoughts on Buying a Pre-Moon Speedmaster

Good luck, and welcome!

cheers,
Mark

 

Hi Mark, thanks for your help. I think I am getting the hang of the ref numbers now. It was the same when I was getting to grips with the Submariner ref numbers (another watch I am / was considering) though to tell you the truth I feel I am edging closer and closer to a Speedmaster. The more I read and think about Rolex the more I feel a 16610 Sub is nearly to obvious a choice and the less obvious choice of a Red letter Sub form the early 70's is out of my price range.
I feel that the Speedy is more discrete, more of an enthusiasts watch and most importantly is half the price of a Sub.

I recently have read the fascinating story behind George Daniels and the development of the Co Axial escapement. Should I give the Speedmaster Automatic with the Co Axial movement a miss? Even though I have read some great things about this movement? Frankly I could get an original Calibre 321 and have change for the price of a new Co Axial.

 

You wont be able to treat a vintage watch quite the same way as a modern one.

While it is possible to get or make a 321 speedmaster waterproof, in general I don't get them wet. I assume they are all porous, even the ones straight from the watchmaker with a waterproof note. Speedmasters have small washers in the pushers and crowns that frankly dont work other than, better than nothing.

Bracelets are less robust than modern.

Having said all that, I wear nothing else but vintage.

It may be because I know that my money is safe, and I can always sell it for near what I paid. That wont happen with a Co-Ax. Lovely story, but you can enjoy it without paying for it.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, but there is nothing "original" about the 145.022-69 other than it was produced on the same year of the moon landing. The true moon watch, the references that made it to the moon, are the 105.012-65, 105.012-66, and the 145.012-67.

 

We are debating about 'semantic' in here. If you are referring to the watch that went to the moon, then yes, your references are correct. Interestingly among collectors and in Omega museum, these references are called 'pre-moon' watch.

The ones that Omega collectors & Omega marketing machine use for "moon watch term" are 145.022-69 (launched exactly on July 1969) followed by 145.022- XX. When they change the movement from 861 to 1861, the reference change to 3750.50. It has a famous engraving script in the back with "Flight Qualified By NASA for All Manned Missions. The First Watch Worn in The Moon"

If you want to research further, you can read in here
http://www.chronomaddox.com/#Moonwatch

 

3570.50 as a daily wearer will start you off fine.

 

I also recommend 3570.50 for daily wear. It's a versatile watch that fit to any occasions.

 

Any of you guys appreciate the Speedmaster Mark II? There are some nice examples for reasonable amounts of money here in the UK. And it has the 861 -

 

Hahahaha. Looks like you haven't made up your mind yet. Take your time and find out what you really want.

If you want the modern iteration of the "Moon Watch" the one you want is the ref. 3570.50.00 as the other posters have mentioned.

If you want an actual Moon Watch reference (same as those actually worn on the moon), then you need to look into the vintage Speedmaster references with the cal. 321 movement as the other posters have mentioned.

Everything else (Co-Ax models, Mk II through Mk V, Racing, Reduced, et al) is just fluff. My opinion and I'm stickin' to it

 

It's a solid and reliable watch. It's just not at the same league in term of provenance with the 'moon watch' hence lower resale price.
If it is your first watch I suggest take the moonwatch. Then add other model for your collection.
Just my 2 cents.

 

Wow such great info as I was thinking about the same issue and didn't know the ins and outs. Thanks a lot everyone!

 

one thing I've definitely made my mind up on is I won't be buying a Sub. Just watched some Christmas TV and that smug cheeseball Michael Buble was on wearing an 114060 sub. Horrible.