How Does the Speedmaster Calibre 321 Compare To The Original 105.003

Robert-Jan · Sep 21, 2021

Omega-Speedmaster-Calibre-321-SS-311.30.40.30.01.001.012.jpg

One of the most heard comments on the Omega Speedmaster Calibre 321 is that you can also opt for an original 1960s Speedmaster reference 105.003. That’s the reference the 2020 Speedmaster Calibre 321 has been based on. Whether you prefer a vintage Speedmaster 105.003 over the new Speedmaster Calibre 321 reference 311.30.40.30.01.001, that’s a different […]

Visit How Does the Speedmaster Calibre 321 Compare To The Original 105.003 to read the full article.

Om3ga321 · Sep 21, 2021

Love both.
My original EW for special occasions .
My new EW for everyday use.It can take the knocks of life.
Omega's best work to date in my opinion.

M'Bob · Sep 23, 2021

Great article, but not an overwhelming fan of the new bracelet.

The spring links on the original flat-links allow for a greater, on the spot comfort accommodation with weather changes, such as being outside in very high heat, when your extremities swell, and then going indoors to air conditioning, when the capillaries constrict again. Plus, changing sizes on the old bracelets require only two pieces of readily-available tools: a tooth pick for minor adjustments on the clasp, and a chop stick to push the plate on the back of the spring link off and on.

MCC · Sep 23, 2021

Nice article, I have not seen the new 321 in the flesh but from the photos it appears to be an elegant watch with some practical benefits over the vintage. Having said that there is something magical about those old Speedmasters that would have me opting for vintage every time.

It will be interesting to see what watchmakers in the future make of the new 331 as they come in for routine servicing. Thanks for writing and sharing the comparison.

watchtinker · Oct 4, 2021

So far, very few people have focused their attention on the new caliber wondering if "the one-watch-maker-assembled-movement’s performance is superior to mass produced 3861 (or, more humbly, I would suggest, to the original 321 movement). This is the fact Omega used to justify the expensive list price and I am curious if it lives up to the expectation".
Any evidence would be welcomed, but the only specimen I have had the opportunity to examine behaves essentially in line with a well preserved ordinary movement from the Sixties.

cvalue13 · Oct 4, 2021

watchtinker
So far, very few people have focused their attention on the new caliber wondering if "the one-watch-maker-assembled-movement’s performance is superior to mass produced 3861 (or, more humbly, I would suggest, to the original 321 movement). This is the fact Omega used to justify the expensive list price and I am curious if it lives up to the expectation".
Any evidence would be welcomed, but the only specimen I have had the opportunity to examine behaves essentially in line with a well preserved ordinary movement from the Sixties.

I too noticed the above-quoted comment from RJs page; I wasn’t sure, but it seemed to possibly suggest that both Omega asserted the hand-building would be more accurate and also that Omega suggested the “hand-building” was the primary/main reason for the expense.

If that was the commenter’s intent, neither struck me as accurate: I took the cost to primarily reflect demand vs rarity, and as for accuracy would obviously expect a 3861Master Chronometer to fare better than the 321.

iirc, my 321 stayed within 2 seconds after 2 days face up on the bathroom counter - which for me is just fine.

cvalue13 · Oct 4, 2021

M'Bob
Great article, but not an overwhelming fan of the new bracelet.

Ive wondered if there’s a forstner with spring links that is plug-and-play on the new 321.

the factory NEW321 bracelet is beautiful and comfortable, but I agree that I’d wish it were better adjustable. to make an adjustable clasp, though, would likely have ruined the clasp’s relative elegance? Which would leave spring links, and I’m not sure how many big manufacturers are even considering that these days?

at least for part of the year, the remedy is:

M'Bob · Oct 4, 2021

cvalue13
the factory NEW321 bracelet is beautiful and comfortable, but I agree that I’d wish it were better adjustable. to make an adjustable clasp, though, would likely have ruined the clasp’s relative elegance? Which would leave spring links, and I’m not sure how many big manufacturers are even considering that these days?

Spring links, unfortunately, give people bad memories of the shabby and cheap Speidel bracelets from yesteryear.

I love the spring links on the flat-links: they always feel comfortable with weather changes, and I like how I can adjust them with a chop stick.

Certainly, if they put their mind to it, SOME designer in the watch world could come up with a modern spring-link iteration that’s even better than the original.

Gruesome · Oct 4, 2021

Doesn't the forstner flat link fit?

cvalue13 · Oct 4, 2021

M'Bob
Certainly, if they put their mind to it, SOME designer in the watch world could come up with a modern spring-link iteration that’s even better than the original.

I’m pretty sure forstner makes one that is spring and should fit

I’m less sure I want to do the legwork to sort it out

How Does the Speedmaster Calibre 321 Compare To The Original 105.003

Robert-Jan

Om3ga321

M'Bob

MCC

watchtinker

cvalue13

cvalue13

M'Bob

Gruesome

cvalue13

Similar threads

From The Archives: What Makes The Omega Speedmaster Calibre 321 So Special?

Omega Speedmaster Calibre 321 Ed White

Omega Speedmaster Calibre 321 - Ed White - 311.30.40.30.01.001 ( new )

What Makes The Omega Speedmaster Calibre 321 So Special?

[Video] Two Speedmaster Broad Arrow Alternatives To The Speedmaster Calibre 321 In Canopus Gold

A Question From A Reader: “Which Modern Speedmaster Is Closest To The Original Moonwatch?”